City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I'd like to call to order the regular meeting of the Campbell City Council for Tuesday, March 24th, 2026. And I'd like to invite Sergeant Najim McGee to please come forward and lead us to the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. S McGee, if you'd wait there just a moment. One of the things I need to do is ask for roll call first.

Perfect. Council member Lopez here. Council member Hines. Council. Council member By present. Council member Scazola here. Mayor Fado here. So now we're in business.

And if you'd wait just a moment, I'd like to uh just make some comments from the podium here. Um, I've asked uh Sergeant McGee to lead us in the pledge of allegiance tonight. He has been the longtime caregiver for our very first working dog, Lucas. Uh, K9 Lucas. Um, we're honoring the life and service of K9 Lucas tonight. Uh, K9 Lucas was, uh, our very first dog and, uh, he was donated by the police foundation in 2019. And a little bit later that year, uh, he was put into service as our first full-time working dog. And, uh, if you've ever seen or knew, uh, Lucas, he was extremely friendly dog. Anyone could pet him. Uh, he was the most friendly dog uh, you could find. But when it was time to work and he was given the proper commands, he knew what to do and went right to work. and uh worked for us until 2023. Uh he retired in that year and uh sadly on March 15 of this year 2026, Lucas passed from us. During his retirement, he became a full-time member of um Sergeant Lucas family. And Sergeant Lucas, by the way, is here this evening with his wife, Mina. Good evening and welcome. Uh and and so um we are honoring uh the legacy of uh K9 Lucas and uh we do now have two working dogs um K9 Koa and K9 Rowan uh that have taken Lucas's place. Uh I might also mention that uh it was very recent, in fact it was just March 13th that um the

nation actually uh recognize National K9 Veterans Day uh to honor all service dogs. And um many of you may or may not be aware of the fact that service dogs have always been a part of the military for many many years. Uh so much so that a formal program was begun in 1942. But prior to that, during World War I, uh, service animals were used. It's estimated that, um, for for all of the combined Allied forces of World War I, there were more than 20,000 working service dogs. And then the program continued. There have been service dogs in World War II, um, Korea, Vietnam, and the global war and terror, several thousand dogs. So dogs are recognized everywhere. We think the kines that we have here in Campbell are very special. So if you take a moment, I'm going to come down with a recognition. Thank you, sir.

Thanks very much. Police officer here as well. Thank you all very much. I just want to thank the city department. It's a great experience regardless of how it is. I just want to say thank you.

I would invite um my colleagues on the council or any member of the public that would like to speak as well under this item. If I may, as a dog lover myself, it is a incredible uh advantage to be able to have a dog, be able to experience a dog and and the demise always happens and it's rough and tough. Uh but uh there's always another dog to come along and that's why I can't be on the SVSA uh board because I'd come home with 10 dogs. So, thank you. Uh, thank you so much for being here and and your family and for for um making Lucas a part of your family. Um, the his coming on to the police force was just a little bit before my time um on council, but definitely by the time that I was engaged and coming and I remember the impact that that had for Gamble and the police department to be such a trailblazer in that area with strong community support. I mean, you just represented the best of our community coming together. um to support something and um Lucas really paved the way for um all the other successful police dogs we've had in that that program. So my my heart's heavy to to to hear that and I know it must be for for you to have had him as a part of your family. Um but uh you know I think we truly say it uh the the the program Lucas just your your leadership and in this program represented the best for our community and um thank you and I know his memory and service will live on um through the other police dogs that we have in this program. Thank you. I think it's pretty undebatable that Lucas was most people's favorite officer and you are the close second perhaps and uh I want to thank you both for your

service and uh the many memories that Lucas gave us.

I want to thank you Nene for um being our first dog handler and um taking the lead and and really u setting the example for the dogs that are to follow. make sure as well. And um I know that in addition to your regular police work, it's an added responsibility to to handle a dog and and it folds into your your family life. But um I I just want to say it's really with a lot of sadness that you had to put put him down. Um it's always difficult no matter what what pet it is. Um but I think that uh we can all say that uh you provided him the best care in the deso and attention well he was on this earth. So thank you very much.

Thanks again Sergeant McGee. We now um move on to special presentations and proclamations. And actually we have uh three proclamations tonight and I will handle each one individually. I'd like to um invite um representatives of the Red Cross uh to the podium if you'd come forward please. Um uh Jonas Mari as well as Mark Edner.

Hi if you'll just uh wait there for a moment. I'm going to sit at the podium here and uh read my remarks. So, um it is my pleasure to um proclaim the month of March uh as Red Cross Month. Uh the American Red Cross is an organization which I'm sure everyone recognizes. Um it's a time uh during this period of the year that we recognize the humanitarian organization um that is well known to the American people and it uh has had an outstanding record of easing persons sufferings uh during life during life's emergencies. Um the volunteers represent the very best of our nation and the very best of the nation's spirit of compassion uh service and resilience. Um the city of Campbell does recognize all Red Cross volunteers uh as represented here tonight uh and especially locally our Silicon Valley chapter of the American Red Cross uh who've worked very hard locally for us for many years. Uh, as you know, California suffers from what are nominally called fires, floods, and faults. So, we have fires, we have floods, we have earthquakes, and the Red Cross is always there. And it's even there, of course, for very small local types of emergencies, small fires or apartment complexes or things like that where a number of people are displaced locally. Um, so therefore, I as mayor of the city of Campbell, on behalf of the council and the city itself, do hereby proclaim the month of March as American Red Cross month. And I have a copy of the resolution.

Please tell your colleagues. Thank you very much. Congratulations. Thank you for the work that you do. We appreciate it. And if you'd like to make some comments, we'd be pleased to have you do so. Thank you. Thank you, Mayor.

So, my name is Jones Marie. I sit on the American Red Cross board for the Silicon Valley chapter. So, it's an honor on behalf of the organization to accept this proclamation from the city of Campbell. Um, it's almost 80 years that this tradition has been honored for our volunteers who support our causes. About 90% of our work comes from volunteers alone. And the community of Campbell is a huge part of it. Something that I recognize in my own work as a board member at the Red Cross. We work for um from disaster relief, supporting families um in the military, uh collecting life-saving blood. You guys are a huge part of our community. Couple of stats I want to just shoot out from Santa Clara County alone. We've responded to over a 100 disasters, over a 100 disasters just this year alone. Um provided about 1,700 services to military families and collected nearly 17,000 blood donations. All thanks to our 2100 local volunteers and donors. So that speaks to this community how much you guys have helped us. If you want to continue to volunteer, we invite you to join us. Just go to redcross.org/volunteer today. And thank you so much, Mayor Ferado and the city of Campbell and your staff for this partnership. Appreciate you guys. I'd like to invite my colleagues to make some comments as well. Started

I want to thank you for for being here and for giving us this opportunity to recognize you. My speaker keeps making noise. It is. I think it might be.

I I apologize. Um, and I just want to thank you for um to the Red Cross for um the service that you provide not only to our residents but globally across the United States. And uh you're always there to help people in dire emergencies and and when the need is uh so so um apparent. So thank you very much for the service you provide to our community. And I I just would say that, you know, I thank you and the Red Cross and all of our volunteers and especially the people of Campbell who literally give their blood to the community.

Yeah, the Red Cross obviously has a international world renowned perspective and excellent to be able to see it and it's just so fantastic to have it so close in Silicon Valley. Uh I've seen it in operation now a couple of times uh in uh just my short time being on the council here. So just uh congratulations for being able to be so local in your uh in your endeavors. Thank you.

Yeah. And I just like to say at a time when um things can seem so uncertain with uh you know who knows what natural disaster is is going to come down, things seem unpredictable. um it gives our community uh a real feeling of preparedness to have that local support and participation. And I also just want to say um having served on on on local boards, thank you for your service and and your colleagues on the board for representing our community uh uh making sure um that we're at the table for those decisions represent March as disability awareness month and I'd like to invite

Kurt. Welcome. If you'll just take a moment, I'm going to uh remain here at the podium again for a short time. I'll come down there. Um whereas the city of Campbell strives to be a community where every individual regardless of ability is treated with dignity, respect and has the opportunity for equitable access to all community programs and services. And uh whereas the Disability Awareness Council, which was founded by Kirk Kang and Ethan Kang, um have worked with local elementary schools to spread awareness um of inclusion uh providing support for students of all abilities and um promoting a number of programs uh both athletic programs and arts programs uh through your efforts. And um whereas uh your work uh has involved dismantling the barriers and addressing the challenges faced by people um with physical challenges. Um we in the city of Campbell and I as mayor of the city on behalf of my colleagues here on the city council would like to proclaim the month of March as disability awareness inclusion month and thank you very much for this very worthwhile project. So I have a proclamation for you as well.

Thank you. Thanks very much. Appreciate it. Please uh feel free to say give some remarks. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Fado and council members. It is wonderful to see you all again since I was here a few weeks ago for the Synopsis Science Fair Awards ceremony. And my name is Kurt Kang. I'm a ninth grader at Westma High School. Um I founded the Disability Awareness Council and I'm also part of the Campbell Youth Commission. I'm extreme I'm extremely grateful to the mayor and council members for helping this opportunity to happen. And this mission is deeply personal to me because my sister has Down syndrome and has a disability and I see the firsthand impact of this inclusion in schools and community. So I'm really grateful for this opportunity and once again thank you all of you guys for your leadership and making this possible. Thank you. Once again, I'll ask my colleague.

Sure. I I just want to start by thanking you for your leadership. Um, not just with this project, but as as you heard, you've been here a number of times, including as part of our youth commission and uh just really appreciate having you as a member of the community. Um, you know, I see a vision of a world that we can all move towards uh where everyone can participate equally and that's really what you're helping to for the next generation. So, I just want to say keep at it, keep participating, being back here um however way we can be a part of those efforts. But thank you really for your work.

Yeah, outstanding work and continuing with this. So, that's just uh fantastic having a a niece with Down syndrome. I have uh seen that experience firsthand and it's just a real tribute to you and and uh for having a disability month, disability awareness month uh is fantastic. It was uh something that we have to do on a 12-month a year basis as well. So, thank you. Great work.

Yeah, this is uh particularly special to me. I I really think that everybody needs to be helped in our society and I know that Campbell is one of those places that we do our very best but it's hard to imagine only about 50 years ago uh we were living in radically different times where if you were disabled it was the burden was mostly placed on the family and uh now we have so many assistance programs we have so many great uh individuals like yourself that are out there bringing awareness and doing things about it. In fact, one of my favorite moments like ever uh on the steps of Congress was when uh a large group of disabled folks, they got out of their wheelchairs or took down their crawled up the steps of Congress to make a point because nothing was getting done. And so that shamed them so much that steps started being taken. And now we are here today and I'm glad that the fight continues. People like you. Thank you so much. And I want to thank you for your uh vision and identifying a need in the community and taking steps to to uh address it and creating a council that u raises awareness. And I encourage you to keep up the great work and um maybe um hopefully spread it to other high schools in the in the Campbell Union High School District. And I would like to now invite members uh Will Fuentes, our director of finance, and members of the finance team to please uh come forward to the podium.

Good evening, Will, and members of the finance team. Uh, it's likewise my pleasure uh to proclaim um this uh week of um March 23rd through March 27th as government finance professionals week here in the city of Campbell. Um as the audience can tell and the viewers who may be tuning in here uh through our television and audiovisisual networks. Uh we have a very robust finance team. U needless to say the finance team is responsible for so much uh making us uh work uh effectively and efficiently. They manage the city's budgets. They make sure that the bills are paid from the appropriate accounts. uh they keep an eye on those accounts and keep the city manager and the council uh as well as the department heads aware of where they stand for each year's budget. Um probably the most important thing that you do for everyone else here is prepare the weekly uh or semi-weekly um paychecks and making sure that the paychecks get delivered appropriately. uh the appropriate deductions are made for taxes, retirement uh uh allotments and things of that nature. And uh there are a number of um US government requirements for rules and regulations and reports and they uh put out the annual comprehensive finance review report uh which is just coming now and uh have consistently been recognized uh with awards of excellent. So um will I wanted to thank you and your team very much. We certainly appreciate it. oftentimes, uh, you probably only are contacted by any of us here if something's wrong, right? Uh, we we just know and expect that things will always

go well and, uh, any complaints that anyone has, I'm sure, are few and far between. So, I do have a proclamation as well. I want to stand.

Oh yeah. Um So I I um I I did um also just well I had to I I did also just I think the council as well. Um it's a it's a um a week and a way a um are our our um across the country across the state um and and it's a it's it's certainly a a great honor um uh uh to our hard our great and hard uh team uh our Um, you know, it's um it's it's it's the first time a time been a a week uh for our whole hot garment. Um there are a certainly a week's um for other well um departments and also for payroll but this is um the third time um it's been eight weeks uh for our our our team um and again um do things like the audit and the

budget. Um part of a payroll uh cut the uh checks or projects as well. Um and you know the the hard um it it um helps um public agencies um all of them across the uh country and the state and also in gamble to achieve their goals and objectives. Um so I am just want to uh to again thank the council um and also our our our our whole uh team um who's up up here today. Um without their work had to work and teamwork um we certainly uh couldn't accomplish all that they do. So thank you everyone. Thank you.

Thank you Will. I'd like to also invite

so for me this is one of the highlights of the year when I we get to um don't go away um get to recognize employee employee groups and finance is no exception and um and as Dan said that oftentimes you probably don't hear from us unless we have a question and I've had one or two of those over my um service on the council but I do want to thank you each individually for the contributions you make. Um it's oftentimes behind the scenes getting business licenses issued, answering phones, um processing payroll, making sure our bills are paid, our financial reporting and and having um reports come to the council. Um it it doesn't go unnoticed by me and I want to thank thank all of you individually for for your work and and for your contribution to the city. It's a great city to work for and to be a part of. And I would just say thank you as always for keeping the lights on and uh whenever I get my packet and I'm looking at the financial data, I'm like, "Oh my dear God, I'm so glad we have a good staff. We can actually go through this and make sure everything is good and proper." So, thank you so much.

Thank you guys. Yeah, ladies and gentlemen, it's a fantastic team. Uh thank you for the tour that I had uh just a little while ago. Uh and uh for my detailed questions. you you always you know I I have detailed questions and I can actually find the answers uh in the material that you provide. So uh really tribute to uh what you present uh as a uh small business owner. I know that making payroll is absolutely the right the only thing that you really need to be able to make sure happen. So um just a a great job on on being able to do that. Uh, and it's you're a fantastic team with the accolades that you get recognized from as well. So, great work.

Yeah. Um, I'm I'm not sure that uh many members of the public know this, but our finance team regularly wins awards from I I think it's GFA, the Government Finance Offers Association, um, for literally decades now. Um, in in in a row because of the the um fine work of our our finance team. Um, and I know having served on the finest in audit committee for a number of years, we regularly get back the the cleanest audits that that that we can. So, it's really a testament to to your work. Um and and beyond just the impact on our our employees and staff here, um I think the the the fact that our ability to go out and be able to do things like Measure O, Measure K is entirely on the basis that people trust that um if if they put their money in the city um of Campbell as residents, make an investment for the future that it will be in good hands and that those are your hands because of your work. So, thank you very much.

Thank you so much. We now move on. We have no communications and petitions. We now move to oral requests. Um, this is the time on this evening's agenda for any member of the public to address the council on any item not on tonight's agenda. And I do have uh two cards. Um, if you'd um like to speak under oral requests, uh, you are requested but not required to fill out a speaker card and give it to the city clerk so that we know you may wish to speak. So, first, uh, I'll ask Roy D. Vtorio to make some remarks. Each speaker has two minutes. They might have something to help if I forgot. Um, first question, have any of you on the council, have you heard of the development that's going on on West Par and Walnut? There's two lots, those nine homes on each. So, 18 homes on two lots. You guys all aware of that? the we are generally aware of it and we are going to receive an additional report um having heard about some of the issues prior to this meeting. So our planning department perhaps not tonight but will be reaching out both to you as well as giving us a thorough report.

Okay. I just drove by it this morning as well this on the way here.

Right. Okay. And I our big concern is that you know I know it's a the state you know it's a pro it's a starter home project 1123 that you could put nine homes on a 20,000 square foot lot which you know it's supposed to be a vacant lot. They're not vacant lots, you know, and the city has maneuvered some rules and, you know, to make it fit their requirements to allow it. And uh I there's a lot of legal things that aren't what the state is saying. I just can't believe this. The council or maybe hasn't got to you guys hasn't said anything about putting 18 homes on less than an acre at the corner. the parking. Every house is going to have an average of two cars and these are bigger lots. And if that goes through, the city seemed pretty sneaky about it because, you know, when I built my house, I had to notify everybody. 300 feet radius. And then we had planning department meetings, planning commission meetings, city council, a lot. And I think a lot of our neighbors in the several blocks there are shocked that this is going in and none of them have been notified. And we're like I we don't see it because there is no there where does it stop? Uh, you know, I can look in the next three, four blocks and find 20 different lots that could be nine homes, you know, and uh we're just uh we're concerned about that, you know. Um, and because I know you guys wouldn't want that popping up next to you and the way the city has worked it and a lot of people aren't aware of it and stuff. I know. So, um,

just wanted to make sure you guys were aware of it and stuff and we'll look forward to hearing from the planning department as what they're doing and stuff because I will say one thing they do not jurisdiction but still since this is not agenda.

Right. I understand. Right. Right. Yeah. I just want to give an example. The state had Okay. So, we have examples of the city going around the state a bit. So, you know, We know, but we'll look forward to hearing from the planned part. Okay. All right. Thanks. Thanks for your time. Appreciate it. I'd also like to invite uh Mitch Sturmer.

I also want to talk about the development of West Par. My goal is not to oppose the development of housing, but to making sure that the policy of SB 1123 are implemented in the way it lines. But the original purpose it does not unintentionally reduce existing housing or destabilized neighborhoods. While I understand SB 1123 is designed to support increase housing supplies for efficiently more efficient land use, the situation arising concern. It appears that the law may be enabling removing existing housing stock rather than encouraging the redevelopment of underutilized or vacant lots. It's my understanding that I could sell my house to a developer and he could try to do an SB123, but the property must be vacant or must come underneath the remainder parcel rule which says you can build around the houses. Uh both these properties are housed or has housing. A vacant lot is specified as a lot that has a a single it's a lot in a single family house housing development. The line is considered vacant if no permanent structure or the existing structure is abandoned or uninhabited. That's in the law. Right now there both these houses there. One person is still living it has missile. The other person has passed away and the state has it. It's a fine perfect house in the neighborhood. Um if they don't SB um 1123 I have no problem with traditions development. Have them come through the city. No don't streamline this. must have the environmental impact hearings. Let's have the follow the rules of the city. They could use SB9, which has another way to break up parcels and do other things. But they don't I don't think this property qualifies under 1123 because I talked to the building uh department. Uh they told me that the city council had given permission to do this. The city council had said they can tear the houses down and do it. I'd like the city council to today say yes we

understand that this is against the law and we did vote on it and approve it if that if that's the case. So this is why we're here. I'm like I said not against the development. Let's do it in the proper way. Let's follow. Thank you. Thank you. I have no other cards. Does anyone wish to speak under oral requests? I'll just ask this anyone on the staff if you want to make a brief comment. Uh I know it's not agendaized. We won't be able to discuss it further, but if you have a brief comment or especially um how you may provide a more say extensive um remark at a at a future time.

Mayor Fat honorable council members Robbie Eastwood, community development director. Uh I have received a substantial number of comments from our staff on the two housing projects and know the city has received a number of starter home housing projects. Uh we do intend to do more outreach to the community uh through email lists and social media just on what the law is, what it allows and the facts and the rules around it. Uh we will have more information to council soon on uh any discretion the council may have in the upcoming future on parts of the law if it may come back to it. But in the near term over the next week or two, we intend to do outreach uh enhance our web. We do have web pages on starter home, but at least get out to the community the facts on what the state law is, what types of projects to go on.

If I if I may just add, I will be preparing a a memorandum to the council regarding the legal issue concerning vacancy that was raised tonight.

Thank you. And I simply request that the um the gentleman that spoke tonight, a more specific reply be made to them as well since they took the trouble to come here and speak to us. So this week's announcements are as follows. On Thursday, March 26th, just a couple of days from now, from 5 to 7 pm, you're invited to join the Campbell Museum for a volunteer recruitment mixer uh to meet the staff and volunteers and explore opportunities from uh serving as a dosent to a foundation board member uh within the Campbell Museum Foundation. They will provide light refreshments and um you can discover how you can work uh in preserving our Campbell's um history and uh with the museum foundation. Secondly, um members of the city of course are invited to um join the fund for the annual Bunnies and Bonnets parade uh that will be held on Saturday, April 4th at 12 noon in downtown Campbell. The Downtown Campbell Business Association sponsors this annual Easter parade tradition that features marching bands, dancers, community groups, local organizations, and others. So, it's a very nice event. In the early morning, um there's the annual egg extravaganza for the children over at the community center sponsored by the Kowanas Club. Next, um, community-minded residents are invited to apply for openings on the bicycle and pedestrian committee as well as the planning commission. So, we have uh vacancies on either of the two um committees or commission. Uh, these

groups help guide the city growth, as you might imagine, including transportation, long-term planning. They review projects, uh, provide advice uh to the council, u, and work to support safer and more connected neighborhoods. So, individuals who might be interested in applying for one of these positions are encouraged to uh contact the uh clerk's office. Um you can do so at uh clerk's office at campbellca.gov or simply call the clerk's office for more information and an application. Next, the annual Mother's Day tea and tour of the Anley House will take place on May 1st and 2nd and 3rd from uh noon until 2 pm. This is a uh very nice uh tradition and a way to celebrate um mothers uh enjoy time with friends or simply uh enjoy afternoon tea and u treats and um elegant attire. So tickets are available at campell museums.com. Also would like to mention that on Saturday, May 9th, um this is an announcement we've all been waiting for. The library is going to open Saturday, May 9th, uh at 10:00 a.m. there will be an opening ceremony for the library at last. Uh this ceremony um is sponsored by the Santa Clair County Library District. Um members of the city council and others from the city and staff will be there. I'll have the opportunity to speak on behalf of the city and um we'll um have a grand opening of the facility. I'm sure that uh you've perhaps if you've walked by there or driven by there, you've seen through the windows. Uh it's a much nicer facility than it was before. Uh a lot more space. And uh we first and foremost thank the voters of the city of Campbell uh for sponsoring or approving measure O, which actually was a $50 million bond fund. 25

million for the library, 25 million for the new police building, which is also nearing completion. and hopefully we're looking forward to its opening uh either in later May or the very first part of June. So, um we thank the voters very much. I will say that both the library as well as our police department sought and received additional grant monies uh to pay for additional expenses at their two respective buildings. So, those are all of the um announcements here. So now we move to the consent calendar. These are items 7.1 to 7.6 that the council will take as a single item of business unless a member of the public um or a member of the staff or a member of the city council would like us to pull an item for individual or further discussion. And I do have one request to pull item 7.6. So would anyone else like to pull another item from the consent calendar? Uh, if not, I would appreciate a motion to approve items 7.1 through 7.5.

I'll appro I'll submit a motion to approve items 7.1 to 7.5 of the consent. I'll second motion by council member Hines and second by council member Scazola. Roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Bybeby. Hi. Council members Fizzola, Mayor Fado. Hi.

We now move to item 7.6. Item 7.6 is the second reading of an adoption of an ordinance um regarding beekeeping. And I'd like to uh ask um Steve Saunders to please come forward. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. Steve Saunders, Campbell Resident. Uh earlier this month when you took the first reading of this uh ordinance, I spoke in opposition to it based on personal safety concerns. And it was recommended that I contact the county agricultural department which I did and they quickly got back to me with a response. Registered beehive locations are kept confidential per California food agricultural code division 13 chapter 1 article 4 29,041. And if you go there has a neat little bit of thing saying notwithstanding the California Public Records Act, if I didn't try to figure out of the title of government code, any information provided according to this article shall be held confidential and shall not be disclo disclosed to any person or governmental agency other than the department or the county department of agriculture. In other words, you guys are out of it. you vote for this, you don't have any more say. Um, and I'm really disappointed that there isn't some notion of letting the neighbors know that something that could be dangerous to them is going to be moved in. I'm not saying you can have a veto or anything like that, but not having any notification seems like a bad idea. I hope that people that put in beehives talk to their neighbors.

Thank you. Thank you. Do you have a further comment, Bill, by chance on this at all? No, only uh that if the records are confidential as as they seem to be, the count the uh anyone wants to put in a beehive in the city of Campbell still still does need to comply with the ordinance that the council is act. Thank you. What is the pleasure of the council on item 7.6?

I would proceed. Uh we had a very large community, the beekeepers guild and many folks, regular folks that uh do this and bees are very good and healthy for our sustainability and in the environment. So, I'm I'm all for it. I I've talked to a lot of people that that want this to go forward. And the uh the regulations that were in existence, if we don't pass this, they're they're outdated. They're truly outdated. It's from the the scare of the the killer bees, Africanized bees, uh that never came to be. That's why these regulations were uh or ordinances were put in in the first place, but they're very outdated. So, um the bees are going to be here no matter what. I appreciate that. I understand. Of course, there are people with major allerg all allergies, but I trust in the the neighborliness of our community that if our neighbors are intending on doing some beekeeping that they would talk to a label for that, but yes, I think we should proceed.

I I'll second, but I' I'd also like to make some comments. Um Steve, absolutely understand the concern. And it's not just you. It's I I I think about this as representing um anyone as I have people in my family who are allergic and I I think would would share the concerns. I I think what we tried to do over this time and and staff try to do was adopt a science based approach that took into account best practices for for dispersal fences spacing. Um, and uh, so I understand it may not be be perfect in in terms of some of the concerns that may be brought up, but but I I think the attempt was truly there from staff to account for public safety. Um, so um, understanding that I I I would uh move the item, but I think what this process has shown me is the importance of education, public outreach. Um, and so I I hope it continues um, in that spirit and and trust that it would and I think the relationships we've established with groups like the B Guild um would would help support those efforts best practices um around safety but truly do appreciate um comments and understand the constraints.

Thank you. I motion from council member Cazola, second from council member Lopez. Um roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Vivey. Hi. Council member Skazola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi.

We now move to um item number eight um on tonight's agenda uh for public hearings and the introduction of ordinances. We actually have two items. They are both related. uh item 8.1 and 8.2 two. Both of these items uh are a discussion and uh they both um discuss or deal with uh Senate Bill 79 which u has been enacted. Based on the information um to be discussed tonight and the inclusion of the items here, um three members of the city council um have a conflict of interest in terms of their residents being located within the sphere of influence and therefore three of us including myself, council member Hines and Council Member Lopez um must recuse ourselves from this discussion and each of us will state the reason why. However, there is a requirement that a minimum number of council members participate in a given discussion. Consequently, we will invoke a rarely used state rule, but nevertheless, a provision in state law that governs this situation called the rule of necessity, which will require us to after we disclose um uh our reasons why we have to recuse ourselves, which will require the three of us to, if you will, draw straws. And the um for item 8.1 it will involve um the selection of one council member. For item 8.2 it will involve the selection of two council members. So the single council member for 8.1 and the two

council members for 8.2 drawing the longest straw are allowed to remain and participate in the discussion per state law. And for just the sake of ease, although we will consider each item separately, for the purpose of drawing straws and determining who may who may participate or not, uh we'll do that sequentially just right up front. And if this is satisfactory with the city attorney, uh I will proceed. Very well done.

Thank you. So I will first of all I do need to ask um the three of us to declare um the situation that will require us to recuse ourselves from the discussion. Um thank thank you. My my understanding conversation with the attorney is I believe it's a half mile from Is that correct? Actually, your situation's a little different. I I know I I'll get into the renter situation, but the distance was Well, the uh the distance of um that SB79 effects is a half mile from a major transit stop.

Okay. Thank you. Um and and and I do just want to note the the unique confluence of of factors of Gamble both being a small land area and being entirely bisected by transit. Um my situation as a city attorney noted is is a little bit different from my colleagues. um I'm a renter and in conversations um it seems that in my layman's terms that it was a little bit more of a a gray area um in terms of whether this particular situation which has to be judged on a case- by case basis applies to to renters. And so while I believe in the importance of representation, I'm listening to the recommendation of our city attorney and and really acting out of an abundance of caution to protect the city uh um in this case. And so um joining in with with the the other two um in recusing unless I'm one of the council members to draw straw. So u is that accurately stated?

Well done. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Uh Terry Hines. I'm uh the property owner with uh or our family trust is the property owner of 2276 Central Park Drive in Campbell. I am the trustee of that trust along with my wife and uh that is within a half mile uh by the crow crow flies from the uh Winchester light rail station. Therefore I must rec recuse myself

and likewise I own property within the half mile radius uh that has been designated and I must recuse myself uh from the discussion on these items. And in addition, of course, your property is designated as a historic structure. So that adds an additional wrinkle to the to the announcement.

Yes, it does. Thank you. So now I will ask the city clerk uh to please um prepare the the straws for us to draw. at this point. What's a lot of Okay. So, um I'm ruled out of discussing both both of these items which creates another problem um since I'm presiding at the meeting. Um however uh that necessitates then me passing the gavl to another member of the city council which uh will require election by the city council. So um I uh nominate Annne Bby to serve as acting chair for the purpose of uh the council considering 8.1 and 8.2. We need a second.

We have a um um motion by myself, a second by uh council member um Skazola. Any other Can I vote on this? Yes. Okay. All right. Okay. Um so, um do we need a roll call or can we do voice a roll call vote, please? Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Vivey. Hi. Council member Skazola. Hi. Mayor

Fatala. Hi. I will now turn the gavl over to uh acting presiding of the meeting uh for items 8.1 and 8.2 uh council member B I'd like to begin with reading uh the title of the uh item. It is discussion of SB79 and requests for council feedback regarding approach to implementation in Campbell including potential preparation of a transit oriented development alternative plan and in parenthesis to alt plan and we'll begin with our public excuse me community development director Rob Eastwood chair by remaining council members. Uh so this item just to tee it up uh there are two items before you uh the first item before you is a study session where we're looking for your direction feedback on how the city approaches the implementation broadly of SB79 and uh Stephen Rose will walk you through more of the facts of the law what it potentially impacts and your options on implementing the law. The second item separately uh is an interm ordinance on what we think is uh a more straightforward way of a first step of implementing SB79 of defining the geographic area so it's clear what areas are in and out of SB79 and excluding historic properties of SB79. Those will be presented separately but for council's understanding those are one after another. Um with that uh with the the chair's allowance and the council uh

it is a this is a very heavy item. It's new state law. Uh it's taken quite some months uh working uh diligently between our planning staff, HD staff, other planners to digest and our legal counsel the key tenants of the law to get here. Um we were going to propose uh two parts to the first conversation. One is a narrative uh for you and any members of the public that are interested just on the facts of the law and the options available uh to the city on implementing. We're think of pausing at that point uh because there's a lot to digest. See if there are comments. I want to make sure the council has a full understanding and after that uh we will continue with the options that are available for your direction on implementing it. With that, I'll hand it over to uh Steve.

Thank you. And good evening, acting vice chair by and members of the council. So, as just covered by Rob, um we are going to provide an over first an overview of SP79 where it applies in Campbell, specifically which standards apply to Campbell. We'll provide an overview of potential community impacts as well as the potential for preparing what's called a transportation oriented uh development plan. Then we're going to go into our implementation options as well as fiscal impacts. So SP79 uh which is also known as the abundant and affordable uh homes near transit act will go into effect on July 1st of this year and what it materially does is it significantly expands housing capacity within one half mile of qualifying transit oriented development stops. uh it establishes among other things minimum building height and floor area ratio uh standards for the city and the requirements based on density and these standards vary based on proximity and the type of transit stop that's involved. Uh the two uh tiers which are included in the law are tier one stops largely heavy rail which are assigned those more intensive development standards like like Bay Area like BART stations as well as tier 2 stops like those which apply to the city of Campbell which have a a little bit of a lower bar. So to qualify for SB79 the project products have to meet a number of criteria. The first is that it must first and foremost be a housing development project which requires it to be at least twothirds residential use. Uh the project has to have also five or more dwelling units and must meet a minimum density of 30 units per acre or which is or whichever is the the greater of that or the local zoning requirement. Uh the projects must maintain a 1750 average unit size as a maximum. Uh the projects are required to provide affordable housing, that being the greater of what's required by the law or the city's local inclusionary requirement. Again, whichever is

greater. And it prohibits uh hotels or short-term lodging to be a component of this project. And last but not least, if a project were to be proposed at 85 ft or greater in height, it would trigger prevailing wage requirements and other labor standards. So, getting to the the more exciting bit of this, um the where SB79 applies, and actually for a matter of fact, it does apply to 25% of the city's land area, which is why we had that discussion point a minute ago, how it does affect even a number of our city council members tonight. Uh it it applies to those four transit stations, those being Baskam, Hamilton, Campbell, and Winchester. Interestingly, Baskam is actually outside of city limits, but does have an overlapping feature with the city within that within that half mile distance. It is measured in a straight line. So as the bird flies and it's measured from the closest pedestrian access point which is an undefined term to the closest edge of a parcel. Uh it applies to all properties which are zoned commercial, residential or mixed use but excludes interestingly light industrial uh research and development public facilities and open space zoned parcels. Uh the city is uh has the possibility to exclude certain qualifying sites. It's actually a separate agenda item. The second one on the agenda on the same topic when they meet uh certain criteria applicable to Campbell are sites which when they are greater than one mile walk distance from a pedestrian access point and when they are a qualifying historic site. So uh as I'd mentioned earlier the stops in Campbell are considered tier 2 stops. So they're assigned uh standards based on that designation and which vary based on proximity to the stop as well. areas in red um are those which are uh the most intensive which are closest to the light rail stops within two 200 feet and are assigned a height of 85 ft which generally translates to eight stories and a density of 140 units the acre

areas in blue which I'd characterize as uh areas such as including our downtown uh would receive a height of 65 ft or six stories that's generally two stories higher than we currently allow and where downtown currently allows 45 ft it go up to 65 and where our downtown's 33 units per acre today it would go up to 100 units the acre uh areas in yellow which is on the peripheral the furthest out those would be assigned uh a density of 80 units per acre an example we have up here on screen is like this includes a number of single family areas uh which are currently as little as less than 7.5 dwelling units per acre the law would allow for up to 80 units per acre on those sites and heights of 55 ft or five stories. Uh just by by way of comparison of this bill compared to our uh more recent housing element update, we're contemplating the production of 2,977 units part of our regional housing needs allocation. We're really looking at close closer to 40,000 new housing units in terms of capacity, which is possible under the law, which is really 10 times the capacity which we anticipated under our prior housing law. Uh just in terms of key community impacts in addition to just increasing capacity o overall as just previously discussed uh it has a particularly high impact to low density residential areas where you see that greatest uh difference happening. Also because the law applies to commercial properties you're going to see a potential conversion pressure on not just the downtown but non-residential properties part parcels that don't presently allow for residential use at all. Uh there's also a risk to mobile home parks, but there's been talk as of late that that might be amended in the law. Uh but as it stands today, mobile home parks are in play. Uh so I didn't want to mention there are a few things the city can consider in response to SB79. Uh first and foremost is we could adopt what's called a

transit oriented development alternative plan or TOD alt plan. It allows the city to modify where and how SP79 applies materially reducing or eliminating capacity on select sites in exchange for signing it anywhere. In short, there's no free lunch. You have to if you remove density from one site, you need to make up for it on another property. Uh and in in the development of a TOD alt plan, the the state uh legislature also included key guard rails. Uh you must maintain the overall capacity. You couldn't say just downzone everything back to the way it was. uh you must maintain at least 50% of the density and floor area ratio initially assigned by site and you must maintain at least 50% of the capacity by SP79 by zone. These are by the transit stops themselves. Uh just in terms of a couple key highlights, pros and cons of developing a transit oriented uh development alternative plan. It does again allow you to reassign development capacity. Uh the second one on the list here we actually underlined which is the preservation of commercial. Again, sites which don't presently allow any residential use, you could entirely exclude from exclude from consideration by doing a to alternative plan. You can technically designate additional sites as historic. Uh you can establish higher minimum densities which can prevent uh some unintended consequences where you might be allowing up to 80 units per acre, but then you end up seeing only town homes being built at that lower say 30 blowing in per acre standard. And it could also allow us to advance housing element planning. Eventually, we're going to need to be planning for these new housing units as part of say the seventh cycle housing element. So, it's just a way of getting ahead of that. Uh in terms of cons, uh there are limited near-term just be given economic conditions. You've heard a number of developers come before you saying it is difficult to build today uh given current economic conditions and there are uh that that same near-term redevelopment likelihood is lower. As a result, uh there are statutory constraints and outcomes. again mentioned those guardrails a moment ago.

Uh there are also process and timeline requirements that come into play. Uh there's also legislative uncertainty. We're not certain that the law won't be amended say even on July 1st when it gets effectuated. And then lastly, we have limited staff resources. Uh there are costs if we were to procure consultant support as well as competing work plan priorities which we will need to contend with. Uh so that's that's the uh part one of our presentation. So we wanted to stop here. uh provide an opportunity to ask questions about the applicability of the law before we get into the actual implementation options. Thank you, Stephen. Are there any questions of council? Council members alone.

Yeah. So, I mean to me it's really sad that people living in mobile homes are yet again forgotten and punished by our legislators in Sacramento. Um so I'm wondering if there are any temporary ordinances perhaps. Is there anything that we can do to kind of protect people in that situation or or is there nothing we can do about that? not outside of the adoption of a transit oriented development plan. the alt plan is really the solution to that that would take a period of time to occur which is why I do believe the state legislature is working on patch fix to that one that singular issue maybe others as well that would be in a near-term update again there's some uncertainty with that

okay well hopefully cross fingers that they actually amend that okay great uh my other question and and uh stop me if this is too early if there I should ask this later in the presentation but am I right to assume that the areas around the Hamilton light rail uh that those might be per say the best uh locations for having such dense housing and we have some sites like Elephant Bar obviously that hasn't been there for many years that's just sitting there. I mean I mean we had gone through an exercise as part of our housing element process to identify what we the city consider to be the best most right housing sites.

So by and large those sites which we've already designated we consider to be the most prime for redevelopment. That said what kind of a unique issue which is being presented by 79. There's a number of sites which we had not considered previously which are those commercial sites which we didn't have any residential component assigned to are now now open for uh consideration. Thank you council member Lopez.

Um I do want I just texted Scott Weiner to express the importance of protecting those mobile home parks. So uh and uh it will fully bring staff and uh everyone on board. So I expect us to have a seat at the table for us. Um absolutely share that concern. Um my question, thank you for the excellent report. I know this is a ton of work by staff to prepare for this. Um my question is actually for Bill just procedural um for both this item and the next one having not been in this circumstance before. Um what are the are do we need a majority of votes just trying and I know I understand this isformational for this item. Um just what's the procedure for this case? Yes. Um, all ordinances require three votes. So, you Well, you're not acting on an ordinance now. So,

not for this one, but I guess the next Yes, the next one actually is an urgency ordinance, which requires four affirmative votes to pass, which is why there were two straws available to vote on. So, it would have to be unanimous regardless of the number of us up here. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um just wanted to kind of frame that. I mean in terms of just providing feedback, it obviously doesn't have to be unanimous on this item for this. Yeah. Um okay. I don't think I have questions. Excellent report preservation visuals. Thank you. Okay, Stephen proceed with a second pass.

Great. So we'll move on to part two here, which is our consideration of implementation options. So I'm going to go over these four options, but I just wanted to recap at the end. We are going to provide a different way of kind of considering these based on kind of where we might want to prioritize and we'll walk you through how these options might align with council priorities of things that you might want to protect or how we might want to go about effectuating u uh SB79. Uh so the first option is really directing staff to initiate a TOD plan al alternative plan immediately walk through some of the highlights pros and cons of that. Second is deferring consideration, which is really what's being recommended by staff. Understanding there is some legislative uncertainty at this time. Third is really looking at targeted reszoning as an alternative or may possibly even in addition to the development of a TOD alternative plan. I'll walk you through what that means. Then lastly, really just allowing SB79 to take effect without further action. So the first option is uh really initiating that to plan immediately. It really provides us the opportunity to start the process prior to the law prior to the effective date of the law on July 1st. Uh it represents our most proactive approach. It minimizes delay in us getting those protective measures like mobile home parks and otherwise as soon as possible. Uh it would provide the greatest near-term control over impacts presented by SB79. Uh however, it may require rework due to legislative changes if they've already addressed mobile home parks and we didn't need to do that. Uh there is also uh some other mapping which is ongoing right now through our uh MTC a bag uh which we might not be able to take into account. So if we started that also be an example rework we might need to do and again with uh actually the first two options it would require ACD review and consultant support to achieve. Uh the second option uh is really deferring consideration. This does not mean that we're not going to pick it up. It just means we're just being a little bit more tactful as for when we would do it. Uh it is the staff recommended

option. Uh our intention would be to start following publication of the station area maps uh and consideration of legislative updates such as those to mobile home parks. Uh it would follow adoption of the annual budget which would allow the council to consider uh the development of a todd alternative plan in in relation to other funding priorities. We to consider where this falls and all of the other uh things which you have to fund and maybe consider and contemplate. Uh it does represent a more balanced approach. Again, it's intended to avoid a lot of that rework which we would other have otherwise might have. Uh it also accounts for cap costs among other priorities and like the like the option for it, it still would require HD review and consult support. Uh option three is evaluating targeted reszonings. This is actually probably the most more creative one on the list. Um which is really something which we could do as an alternative to a TOD alternative plan or in addition to one. Uh what's unique about the bill is it does only apply to again the categories are commercial uh residential mixed use. Campbell has a kind of an unusual circumstance in that we have a number of parcels which are both industrial and and commercial in that mixeduse designation. So, what this would do is we would seek out those properties that are industrial, meaning matching their existing land use to what they uh could be designated and potentially look at re targeted resonings of those parcels to make it so that they're only industrial as opposed to a kind of a combining mixeduse designation. Uh in so doing, we would help preserve and protect those sites, which we would see possibly at a greater risk of that conversion to uh being at conversion to housing. uh as a result it does help us protect our industrial mixed use sites. Uh it does not require HCD review. Uh it would require limited to no consultant support and it would be uh but but as a counterpoint again it's a little bit more creative. So, we're there is a possibility that this could be seen as potentially counter to the

intent of SB79. And like many other bills like ADU legislation and other laws that have passed uh uh in prior legislative cycles, they could look at doing something retroactively saying, "Oh, well, it was the zoning as it existed on January 1st of 2025, preventing us from uh doing these targeting resignments." Uh also uh just as a point on this, it does require uh coordination with the property owners because it would be affecting them. So there could be potential opposition there as well. Uh under option four, this is us taking no further action. It doesn't mean we're not doing anything. Uh this would be we would still consider possibly doing the pursuing the walk in historic removals as the second item on tonight's agenda. Uh this broadly recognizes there's a low term uh or lower near-term risk of redevelopment of many of the parcels that are under consideration here uh except for select non-residential parcels. A lot of the densities could also candidly be developed under state density bonus law at a lot of the densities we're talking about is just kind of looking at that holistically. It also recognizes that SB79 guard rails limit the effectiveness of any TOD alternative plan. There's only so far we can go. We can't shift all the densities down. only moved so much and you're having to make up for that density somewhere else. Anyways, uh it does also allow you to um uh I will just add that this by pushing by by delaying a action on this by taking option 4 we can consider uh the TOD alter that pretty much SB79 in context more comprehensively as part of the seventh cycle housing element update. Uh that said as a drawback it doesn't provide the least control over the near-term outcomes. Uh okay so as promised uh I wanted to provide almost like reframe the conversation under a different context. This is under how you might see these options being presented for what your priorities are. So the first is which does the council see or the city see are

the most important for us to protect. You'll see the associated options which would help accomplish those outcomes. So if if the city saw single family residentials being the single most important to protect and doesn't mean that these are mutually exclusive, you'd be possibly considering options one and two, uh there are options for the downtown or commercial or mixed use that mixeduse industrial which is uniquely supported by option three, which is that kind of that targeted uh reszonings. Uh just in terms of a second secondary question, how urgently should the city respond? This is really kind of weighing how great you perceive the risk to be of this redevelopment potential actually being real versus it being theoretical. Uh if a more immediate solution uh is desired, you'd be looking at either option one or option three. If you're looking at waiting for SB79 to be uh legislation to be a little bit more settled, you'd be looking at option two, which is a staff recommended option. Or if you're looking at pushing it further out, you'd be as part of say the next housing element cycle be option four. And then which tools does the city want to use to accomplish its aims? Again, you could either pursue that to alternative plan uh which is mentioned earlier, options one and two would achieve that or we could be doing targeted changes to general plan and zoning map which could be both option three and at a much later state option four. Um I wanted to stop actually in I'll provide an over I'll provide overview of fiscal impacts but I do want to stop on the options and kind of gather your feedback. Uh there's no immediate fiscal impact for discussion tonight. Again, we're not this is just a largely a a discussion item. Uh options one through three do however range in costs. This has not been done before, so we don't have really great benchmarks from consultants of how much it costs to prepare a TOD alternative plan. However, we did uh solicit uh initial estimates and we're coming at a ballpark estimate about between$100 and $300,000 really depending on how far you go with it. Uh and again there's no cost associated

with option four which is that the take no further action at this time option. Uh so with that uh I'm available for any additional questions on the implementation options but I could also take us back a couple slides and maybe what we could do is maybe start with the the priorities and see see where that might lead us in terms of the options. Thank you Stephen. Questions on the second half. Council member Scazola.

Thank you. Um, so my questions revolving around the targeted resoning aspect. Um, so you know, I think about businesses that are, you know, tried and true, huge staples, great revenue source for us like Home Depot or Economy Lumber, but they'd technically be under threat to be potentially out of business or moved and in place. We got dense housing. Am I understanding this correctly? Unless we do some kind of or take the uh targeted reasoning.

That's correct. They're a greater threat under SP79 than they have been under prior legislate legislation like SP6 or AB201 because they the stand the the density is higher and the requirements to satisfy are much lower and uh yes those are at the greatest risk and to preserve those you'd be looking at doing a TOD alternative plan. Okay, great. Uh yeah, I mean I definitely personally want to protect our already established businesses that bring in so much income for us but that's my only real question at this point. Thank you. Council member Lopez, any questions? Um, Stephen, I have a couple on the the item three on the target, it changes to the general plan, which is option three. Could you go back to the other screen?

Oh, yes, of course. Under the number two category, um, it it's recommending that that would be an immediate action to follow up on. Um, what could could it wait? Suppose that we uh the council uh direction is to go with um what once SB79 is settled. Would that be an appropriate time to consider that or is immediate like meeting tomorrow? Yeah, absolutely. You could you could you could delay it until following uh the effective date of SB79 once the legislation is a little more settled as well.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. Any further questions? So, if there are no further questions at this I'm going to open the public hearing for uh individuals who wish to speak on this item. I do have one um speaker card from Raul Sigamonyi. I hope I pronounced that somewhat close. Almost. You have two minutes.

Totally fine. So, I'm Rahul Sagami. Uh I'm multiple planning manager at the BTA. Uh just want to know that BTA has been following SB79 closely and is very interested in continued dialogue with local jurisdictions about the implementation of SB79. BTA staff has been participating in countywide meetings on SB79 implementation along with staff from city of Campbell and other affected jurisdictions over the past several months. We believe that SB79 can play an important role in creating more vibrant complete communities around the rail stations in Campbell, generating transit ridership and reducing vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions will also be reduced. Um we recognize that implementation of SP79 is very complex as there are many nuances to the law. Um also noted in the staff presentation uh especially since we're waiting for guidance from the state and mapping from the region. Um VT stands ready to serve as a resource for city of Campbell to assist with SB79 implementation and available for any support to the city. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Is there anyone else in the audience that does wishes to speak?

I thought I turned in a slip. I guess not. Good evening honorable council. Um, so this bill is not completely settled yet is what I'm hearing. And I would think there should be some things that council should be talking to our legislators about. The one is the industrial park, the industrial one is the mobile home. Uh, the next item on on your agenda is about the walking distance. So I'll save that for then. And I'm concerned about this converting of commercial sites. Um, I think most of you aware that the small portion of property taxes that cities receive from housing developments does not offset the expenses that a housing development uh puts on the city, maintaining sidewalks, water, sewer, all of that kind of stuff. So the more we convert house uh commercial and properties that are generating tax revenue and that high have a higher parcel tax to housing, we're going to be really draining the city systems, our budgets and everything else when we're looking at multiple thousands of people. Uh what is this going to do to your budget if you like get rid of Home Depot and build housing there? That's one of that neighborhood is one of our highest sales tax generators. So, I would really encourage you guys to reach out to the legislators and get this refined now in the bill. I do not want to see our industrial and commercial land being taken. We do need housing. I'm not anti-housing, but I'm really worried about the fiscal stability of the city. Thank you.

Thank you, Susan. Is there anyone else in the audience? Alan, please come forward. Um, Alan Zisser, I'm I'm on the planning commission, but I'm speaking on behalf of myself. I was actually just here to listen to that. I didn't know whether it was going to come from the planning commission. Um, I have more about questions. I'm actually kind of surprised there there's not more questions from you. Maybe you understand this better than I do. Um, the 40,000 units number is mindboggling. And that the implication to me is that because of the radius, the radius includes single family resident neighborhoods. Okay? So there's multiple single family residential neighborhoods that are potentially impacted by the radiuses including north downtown, south downtown, um um other areas uh off of Winchester that are residential major residential neighborhoods. So my question would be what pragmatically is the potential for this impacting all the nice single family home residential? It was on the list that Stephen put up there that that uh single family home residential has potential impact. So I would want to understand what that means. Um as well as the potential impact for downtown. Does this mean there's going to end up being potentially a bunch of eightstory and nine-story buildings in and around downtown? I would want to understand pragmatically what that implies. And the only other question I have is Stephen didn't have uh on the tier 2 from my reading of the bill, it includes the bus route, the major bus routes too. Now, maybe we're not in our our instance. In

the past, we've had a a major bus routes as part of mass transit in terms of the radiuses. I'm not sure why that's not being considered this time. So, I'd be interested in hearing why the bus route, which which basically runs mostly along Basco. I would want to understand that, too. Thank you. Thank you, Alan. Anybody else in the audience? and Andrea, do we have anybody online?

Okay. So, I'll um close the public hearing and I'll bring it back to council for discussion. Uh but first, um Stephen, could I impose upon you to um in a nutshell um explain the impacts of Mr. Scissor?

Yeah, I heard two topics. One was the impact of single family. Just explain that in greater detail. Uh candidly, again, again, you have that radius. It depends on what proximity those single family residences are to the transit stop. But as we had illustrated earlier, you could have a situation where single family areas are designated up to 80 units per acre. Uh even under the adoption of a TOD alternative plan, we've mentioned those as guard rails. So you couldn't say even in those circumstances reduce that impact to say less than 40 units per acre even following the opices of law. Um I will mention convers on the other side of the equation though you have other bills like SB450 and SB123 which have already raised what's possible on the low end which is kind of getting you I won't say all the way there but getting you much closer. I would say the impacts are generally less than maybe are presented by saying that's 80 up to 80 units an acre which is technically possible. Um, on the downtown, uh, I did mention previously, I mean, we're looking at possibly an increase of two stories, uh, in terms of heights and an additional density from going from say, it varies, but say 33 units per the gross acre up to, I believe it was 100, uh, in those areas which are designated blue on the map. So, that' be it would be an increase in density, which would be a possibility in the downtown. Uh, the third comment, which I am recalling now, was about the bus stops, what bus lanes were not added. The bill has very particular uh ways of defining and describing which which transit transit oriented stops qualify. I believe the bus stops in particular required a dedicated bus lane which excluded those bus those rapid transit line those more rapid lines in Campbell which are otherwise defined under other bills as major transit stops like AB2097 defines. They are not included for purposes of SP9 but they are certainly included under other bills.

Perfect. Thank you. that provides some clarity. Um, so I'll bring it back to C council. Oh, Stephen, would you also bring back that um priority so we can focus our direction closely using that? Um, Council Member Lopez, thank you. I'll I'll wait for for that slide because I was going to have to say

Thank you. Um, And again, great job to staff on the presentation, the way it's being laid out, the way we're being asked for our feedback. Um, really helpful and I think we are far ahead of many other cities and considering the significant u uh impacts and being able to to to take in input um in in a thoughtful manner. So, I just want to start by saying that um in in the past year when this was debated before the state legislature um on an individual basis and making it clear that I was not representing the city on any behalf, but I I was highly engaged on this with the bill authors because from my perspective um I thought that as more of these changes are coming down um we we have more of an opportunity to weigh in and be at the table if we engage in these discussions um uh rather than either trying to do nothing or to say we're going to categorically oppose. Neither of those has been the the attitude in my time here at the city of Campbell. And so I appreciate the work of staff. And that's going to really provide the context for my comments, which is that I I think by thoughtfully and strategically engaging on the pieces where we can have the most impact, where we can take in the um and prioritize in the way that value that that matters most, our community. And I'll go there in a second. I'm really interested also in hearing the where how my my colleagues feel about prioritizing this, but that that is the way that we're going to best be able to shape um what uh change looks like um uh in in the future. But I I don't think that um doing nothing is an option. I I don't think that's going to um best represent us. And um as Stephen said, there's no free lunch with this legislation. Um, I think we really have to make considered trade-offs and that's going to mean um that we we can't say, well, we want to protect all these, we really have to prioritize because that that just means that you're going to make unrealistic trade-offs um in other places. I also want to um start with the point that

Stephen just made and really emphasize that which is that much uh on on on paper it may sound like a dramatic change but if you really look at the impact of prior state legislation and what that does to our heights um effectively and we've heard this a number of times I'm I'm I'm not sure it's generally understood by the broader public but that um our our ability to say we have height limits and and for that to really have effect at the local level um is really very limited and really if uh developer uh stacks these density bonuses the right way they they can already exceed um what we have on paper as our height limits. So, I'm not sure that it is that dramatic of a change. And so, the the fact that you have had these opportunities available to developers, but that we don't all of a sudden see eight-story buildings all around town um I think should give us some positive if we u think that overnight this is going to completely transform the character of our town. the reality of market conditions um and and just what is feasible um is just that that that if that were the case we would have already in my opinion seen that um happening but I think it does give us an opportunity to um be thoughtful about where are the tradeoffs um that that we want to make. I I I also and I only do this because um uh Susan I consider you a dear friend. I would respectfully disagree with one of the points that you made and just again because I think this provides the context for what we're thinking. Um I think for a long time, frankly, for most of the history of Campbell, um it was true that there was a trade-off between jobs and housing. This was where where the jobs housing imbalance came from. Um in that, uh commercial sales tax was where um we really made up the bulk of our uh city budgets. Um and um property

tax would would come in lower. Um I around the time when um I came on council, I saw that starting to shift in the other direction. And I think we we've really definitively seen that um flip where most cities and certainly true for the city of Campbell get more um of our tax base from from uh property taxes. And so if you think of it like a business, which is not the the terms on which I make my decisions, but if you think of what's quote unquote most profitable, it really is residential at this point and and not um sales tax. So I just want to say that to provide context and I think we can disagree and and uh you know room for that. Um but just in terms of balancing our budget, that is actually not my main consideration here. If it were, I would say, you know, build all the housing because of the numbers show that that that's going to um I think provide a stronger budget. That said, that's not the basis on on which um I'm prioritizing among the options. And so, just to to cut to the chase of what you presented here, um I am concerned about preserving um our uh commercial um especially in downtown areas. So, you know, we we can't do all these. We can't say we're going to completely shift around to protect all these. But I think if we have to prioritize when I think of what adds the character and what is unique and special about Campbell, it really is a lot of our mom and pop businesses, especially along this corridor. So, I do want to try to prioritize as much as possible. Um, especially the the commercial the longtime businesses that we've had. The individual businesses can shift over time. I'm not saying they're going to um stay in place, but it adds greatly to the character, the diversity, the amenities that people access when they're living here, when they move here. Um they want to go to our um commercial. So, it would um greatly um in my view harm and impact the character um of our town if we were to lose many

of those options. Um to a lesser and and so I think if we're prioritizing on the commercial, I I would say start with the the downtown. Um, and I say to a lesser extent, the mixeduse um industrial, it it is something that I've consistently been an advocate for. Um, in in terms of preserving our mixeduse industrial, we all know that um not only are those um uh key tax bases uh for for Campbell, but we really have some of the only remaining uh mixed use industrial that provide more affordable options for such an incredible diversity um of businesses. Um, it's a little bit less front-facing in many cases um, in in terms of what our community sees on just a day-to-day basis. Um, but I think it's another really essential part of um, uh, of of what makes Campbell unique is to have those businesses and we know that people come in from out of the areas. So, I I would say for question number one, I would start with commercial and secondarily um, mixed use industrial. Um, with number two, I I really would um I I defer to the recommendation of staff that um I I think it does behoove us um to to to wait a little as as I said, I I do think and as as one of my colleagues was saying, um we should try to be um active and and I would say not just saying that we're going to protect um mobile homes and maybe some of these other properties, but um I would encourage our legislators to do so on an urgency basis so that we have that assurance sooner rather than later if it seems like that's going to be settled. And so um that I think is something that being worked through our legislative um uh committee um and and other places that um I think being active in this legislative cycle um is key. And um in in terms of number three, I would say

may uh I would um begin with the the to alternative plan maybe uh kind of reduced option, not a maximalist version where we say we're trying to preserve all these um but reduced option where we really prioritize the the um commercial um that that we think is most contributes to most of the character of our town. And then I would say secondarily and again not from a maximalist perspective but um in very targeted areas especially around the mixeduse industrial um perhaps looking at reszoning and it may be more uncertain but I think um given the unique nature of our town um that that could be really worthwhile um and I think would be in keeping um with with our values and what we've we've established. So, um, you know, again, just reiterating my my support for doing all we can to protect our mobile home parks, which are some of our best naturally, um, uh, affordable areas and, um, once they go away, we're not going to get more mobile home parks. Um, so doing all we can there. Um, but I I I I really think by engaging, being thoughtful, we can look at it as an opportunity. So, those are the areas in which I would prioritize, but it's an immense amount of work. Thank you staff for uh really engaging being active on this proactively. Um many other cities um I I know are still in the process of beginning to pull some of this together. So um it's immense amount of work and thank you for for all you're doing.

Council members Gazolo,

thank you. I respectfully disagree with your claims that the income from property taxes is going to compensate or eclipse the amount of sales tax. We've just been shown a couple years back, as you remember from our economic development team, that sales tax is by far our greatest source of income, especially now that the people of Campbell passed Measure K, we'll be receiving a windfall, hopefully, knock on wood, eventually. Uh, and if we start eliminating, you know, these businesses, and there are many within this zone that can be can be eliminated. Not that they will, of course, we don't know. We don't have a crystal ball, but if they are and we put these very dense houses in there up to 40,000, I think it was. I mean, I don't even know if that's going to make up for it, you know, but nobody wants that many units in the in the same spot. That's just my opinion. So, I would very much uh like to go with staff recommendations, but I would also I think it's key that we we do the targeted reszoning and of course with the property with the uh uh the property owners, it's ultimately up to them, but I think we can start having these conversations. And I think it's very valuable and I certainly do not want to eliminate our businesses and that's part of what keeps us a a real city. If we're just houses then suddenly we're a suburb. I don't want Campbell to be a suburb. I want us to stay the perfect town where you have everything here that you need including the Home Depot, including you know economy lumber, including all these amazing businesses that we have here that are within this zone. So I'm very I would aggressively be targeting reszoning. So that's just my opinion.

Thank you. Thank you. So, so I just want to note in terms of the staff actions that's the exact same thing. So, just wanted Oh, really? Okay.

Okay. Um, so answering the question one, for me, uh, the mixed juice industrial is, um, would be a priority as well as the the single family residential. Um, I just think that we have to do what we can to preserve our our city, our neighborhoods, our um, we heard earlier this evening about the the development that's happening in in the Santomas area and how, you know, one one house is going to become 10 10 houses on on a on a lot. So I think the single family residential is important to preserve and and balance um u with our other um priorities. Uh I would again concur with the staff recommendation that um we should wait until SB79 legislation is more settled. I don't think that we should be getting out ahead of it. Uh we've seen time and time again where the state has changed or a bill has been amended and um we're we're um in a position now where we're trying to catch up with everything that's been legislated and um you think you get to the to a reasonable point and then another law gets changed or added and um we're we're back to square one and I definitely would support the targeted changes to the general plan and zoning map um uh under option three and I don't know that it needs to be done immediately but I think it would be would be suggested to be done in conjunction with um uh option two when this the legislation is settled and I I do agree that we need need to protect um the mobile home park that we have mobile home parks and whatever we can do as a council and speaking to our legislators to pos al possibly get that bill amended would be u beneficial to to Campbell. So that concludes my comments. I don't know if that's enough direction for Rob

and Stephen. Does council have any further comments or I I I have one comment and again any of this is um you know just wanting to make it part of the the public record and just speaking on an individual basis but at at this public meeting but I I did just get a message from Senator Weiner that he's committed to supporting the mobile home uh cleanup. So uh how's that for for fast action?

I just maybe we should all be on the hot line to him. There's a couple other requests we have on $70 pos um uh just reading back I had asked even to not uh put the mobile home selection on the screen knowing that was probably better as legislative fix just to clarify that uh just reading back I hear clear consensus from the council on option two to wait till things are settled uh I heard uh priority feedback from council on commercial mix industrial and some feedback on single family and both to pursue the TLD alternative plan and the general plan zoning which could be done. So I just want to make sure uh you're hearing from us the feedback to go forward based on council direction. In terms of general timing I I'd say I'm trying to remember on state legislative cycles we're probably looking at somewhere between August and October to see how things are settled. So just to set time and expectations, HD guidance some should be out sometime in July and then we probably see where the state is with amendments that time. That's all.

Thank you again for your great presentation.

Indulge for a moment. We're going to bring our council member Hines back into the meeting. Welcome back, Council Member Hines. So, this brings us to 8.2 on that council agenda. Let me introduce the uh item public hearing to consider the adoption of an interimm ordinance identifying specific sites for exclusion from Senate Bill 79 applicability amending section 21.02.02e 102e conflicting requirements of the Campbell Municipal Code to clarify the acquability of state and federal preeemptions to the zoning code, including as related to the implementation of Senate Bill 79, amending the zoning map to add a reference to historic structures of merit and authorizing submitt to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for statutory review. And our presenter is Stephen Steven Rose, senior planner. Thank you, Stephen.

Thank you. Good evening again.

So, by and large, I won't do too much recap on the last item, but again, SP79 will go into effect on July uh 1st, 2026 and does significantly expand what's possible for housing capacity known as half mile transit stops. Uh it does allow however the city to in addition to the prior considerations with the TOD alternative plan there's another tool that the law provides which is allowing the city to exclude certain sites provided that they meet certain site exclusion criteria and they are adopted by ordinance. Uh you satisfy specific findings and that all of this is submitted to HC well in advance of the July 1 effective date of the law. Uh the two relevant categories for Campbell uh include walking path exclusions. These are sites where uh it lacks a pedestrian walking path of less than one mile from a qualifying TV stop or pedestrian access point which must be supported by substantial evidence in the record. And the second is historic register exclusions. These are sites that are in the city were previously designated historic resources on a local register as of uh January 1st, 2025. So just kind of walk us through the two exclusion categories which which are relevant to Campbell. The first is the walking path exclusions. Again, these are sites which are there is no walking path of less than one mile between the site and the pedestrian access point. Unfortunately, the law doesn't provide a clear definition of what constitutes a pedestrian access point. This is one of those areas which is subject to legislative uncertainty. Uh there's an intention for MPCA bag to provide official mapping of what constitutes these these radiuses these points. Uh but until such time staff has identified a really effectively a two-step process to write go about our own mapping process understanding the law is going to go into effect on July 1st. Uh first what we went through is an exercise of mapping each pedestrian access point at every transit stop. This would be say the width of a staircase, the width of the elevator. There's like actual access gates at the uh downtown station.

And then what we did was we measured those walking distance using manual path tracing as well as public walking directions like those which are like Google maps uh to effectively demonstrate that some of these sites in the city are more than one mile walk distance and we came up with a list of sites which were eligible for removal based on that. In addition, the historic register uh exclusions were a lot more straightforward. Again, it's those sites which were on our local historic register as of January 1st, 2025. Uh, interestingly, just based on the crop circles alone, those half mile radiuses, 123 out of 143 sites are included, which makes sense because they're around the the major transit hubs of the city. Uh, but to avoid having to revisit it uh for any reason because the exact radiuses are somewhat unknown, it's staff's approach to just include all sites in the exclusion list and these would remain in effect until one year following the effective date of the seventh cycle housing. So in addition to the uh the site removals based on walk distance and historic uh designation there are before you a zoning code and map amendment. The first the zoning code amendment just broadly acknowledges preeemptions by state and federal law or appropriate like as in the case of SB79. It also provides authorization for the director to issue interpretations to effectively identify where there's a conflict in state law or local code and describing how they will be addressed until such time the code is amended. It also provides an opportunity for us to maintain a list of properties affected by applicable state or federal law uh including as related to SB79. So SP79 specifically is trying to provide greater uh transparency in the process. So if somebody were to come forward and say, "Hey, can I apply for SP79 in my site, it makes it much easier for us as staff to communicate to a member of the public you are you are or are not included as an eligible site." So that's really what that does. Uh in addition, uh there would be a zoning map amendment. This wouldn't actually be changing the colors on the map. This would just be adding a footnote. And the

intentive there is just to indicate uh really effectively uh historic sites or structures of merit as they're defined. to be eligible for exclusion of your SP79 as is required by SP79. It specifically indicates that if you do exclude these sites, you must indicate such on your zoning. So, this would accomplish that. Uh so, that uh staff is recommending that the uh city council adopt an interim ordinance. It does require a majority vote, which I'll let our city attorney speak to if necessary uh as presented in this uh staff report item. And that concludes staff's presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Stephen. Other questions of Stephen? Uh, Council Member Lopez.

Thanks, Stephen. Um, I I know as you said, it's not uh clearly defined in legislation, but um I'm wondering if you could just talk a little bit more about the walking exclusion and specifically um the work that your department has done so far to map that out. Um would this be work that would need to be carried out? I know you have an example here. How comprehensively mapped is that? And do you have an idea of the scale of impact back?

Yeah, I'll add we were very exacting in our approach and identifying these mapped locations. So we pulled latitudes and longitudes at each bounding edge of a say a door or a gate and we connected those to create a line and that line segment is what which we buffered off of to be very accurate. Um we have conferred with MTC and AVAC about our methodology. We've shared with them our data files, pretty much our our geospatial files saying this is how we've approached the exercise and we've gotten feedback from their team that they'd be approaching it in either an identical or nearly identical manner to that which the city had approached the exercise. Uh as far as the walking distance itself and how that's being measured, that's broadly at the discretion of HCD to determine if we've met the substantial evidence standard. Uh in the actual uh ordinance you'll see as exhibits you'll see all of those latitudes and longitudes identified an extensive efforts and mapping that the city had done staff had done to document our our exercise and how we come to those conclusions by multiple paths of travel that that onem distance could not reach.

So the sites have already been mapped out. That's correct. So and there actually are indicated as part of the uh the items fall. So, in in the ordinance, we're specifically identifying those sites which qualify for the walk distance. Yeah. So, I'll reserve my comments, but incredible work. Thank you, Council Member Hines.

Yeah, I just if you can pull up the ordinance again. I saw the historic component of it, but I didn't immediately see the walking component of the ordinance. That's what your intent was to include it. One second to pull it up from the packet. So this is the the council the ordinance before you. So it is divided into two parts. The first part does provide for the walking path exclusions. It starts off with that overarching map showing with shaded hashes those sites which would be which are qualifying for walk distance exclusions. These are broadly those which are on the other side of highway 17 are just inaccessible. We do go through the specific uh addresses uh both based on our GIS identification number, the address and APN number. We walk you through our walk distance maps and again those other things. Uh and as far as getting to the comment that uh previously these are on screen. These are all those latitudes and longitudes. So for each station, say Baskam station, you're identifying six plus I want to say the definitive pedestrian access points and the corresponding.

Yeah. Um I wasn't questioning the excellent and very very detailed, but it's just in the wording of the ordinance uh that you uh the slide that you showed. It was one of your slides uh that you the slide of the ordinance showed the historic component of that and I wasn't sure where the walking component was in the ordinance that you had proposed. It was in your was it on the recommendation slide here?

Um yeah right. So I did I see in there reference uh amend the zoning to add a reference to historic such met. I don't see in there where you're talking about the walking component. Okay, understood. It's actually this first uh portion here. So that it's identifying specific sites for exclusion from Senate Bill 79 applicability. So that's conveyed for both the the historic sites and the walk distance sites later. This is specifically amending the zoning map to provide just that that footnote. Okay. On the map that that would not need to be included for the walking distance sites. That's only require historic and that's a that's peculiarity of the bill itself. Okay.

Why why it said historic and not the walking ones, I couldn't tell you. Do we with it the wording in there does it in I'm I'm unclear how it would include the walking. I think the title is a little bit less clear, but the ordinance itself uh if you read in the ordinance has a specific section that's titled walking path exclusions. Okay. It's quite detailed. All right. Okay. Sorry. Thank you. That that answers my question. Council members, any questions?

I have one question. Um Stephen, and it it actually refers to the previous item about the action that could be considered retroactive. Um is um I and I forget what part of it was could be considered retroactive. if we took an action and it might be is any of this urgency orderedness. Could any of that be considered retroactive and um be reversed? I I will offer that there is still legislative uncertainty with this action which is why we strategically approach this as an urgency ordinance as opposed to trying to do permanent ordinance. Okay.

Understanding that we will need to extend it. So we'll be coming back before you in that 45day time frame. But also if we were to extend it for say 10 months thereafter we'll hopefully gater certainty at that point and we'll need to come back and make this a permanent ordinance. So that will need to still occur and we're hoping to do that in a time frame that makes sense but this gets us before HCD and I would just mention the ordinance to go to HCV if HCD has comments modifications and so the urgency ordinance does go to HCD. That's correct.

Thank you. Are there any other questions? If not, I'll open the public hearing. And I don't have any cards for this item, but anyone in the audience is welcome to speak. Um, Susan Landry, I think my cards are getting lost, you guys. Thank you again, council. Sorry, I didn't catch that.

Okay. Sorry. Thank you again. Uh, Sergio, you reached out to Scott Weiner. Will you please re reach out to him again? This whole thing is around a half mile radius because that's what you're supposed to be able to comfortably walk to get to work is a half mile. But now you have an exclusion. Okay. If you physical barriers are in your way every half mile, like they are over in Campbell Village. Oh, but then you get to walk a mile. So if you're at what? Two feet short of a mile, then you still qualify. The bill needs to say if you aren't within a half mile walk because that is what the intent is is if you build within a half mile you can comfortably walk but now you're saying okay but I can walk up to three feet less than a mile. That's not a comfortable walk anymore. So please reach out to your quick text person over there and um take a look at that. Uh let's see what was the last thing here. Um I brought this up over the years. uh there's no legal connection nexus between a light rail station and the housing development at any time VTA could discontinue a station i.e. maybe Hamilton which doesn't get used. So where is the legal nexus that says a light rail station cannot be removed in any of these? That to me is the biggest thing is if they start just like they got rid of our bus routes, what's going to happen if a station closes and you build 40,000 units or whatever. So, please reach out to your uh friend there.

Is there anybody anyone else in the audience please come forward?

Dave Mareno uh community lived here for 31 years grew up in Saratoga. How many people took We're laughing. So, I'm not pushing back on this committee. I'm pushing back on the state. Several things went to mind. We have light rail that primarily for our residents in Campbell goes to the San Jose Sharks or to a 49 football game. Other than that, I've worked in the Bay Area. I've worked at San Francisco, Certino. I have to drive. I cannot get there even if I want to dig like ramp. So, I know the government is trying to help us, but they don't know our city. Two, we're going to put 40,000 homes in this area. I don't have water. I don't have electricity. We don't have parking. So, if the government, I'm not a big fan of our current Sacramento, but if they're going to mandate us to do this, are they going to supply Campbell with electricity? Are they going to supply us with water? I took out all my lawns and put in fake lawn. So, this all sounds really good from Sacramento. It's not deployable. It doesn't fit our needs. And I don't see Sacramento having ninestory buildings. The other thing is if they're going to mandate us to do this, the people that buy the houses need to have a commute to go to Google or Facebook and live there and work there. Otherwise, we're going to build this stuff just like off of LARK and nobody's going to be in the units. Question. What is affordable housing? My stepson's looking for a house. Is affordable housing 1.5 like across from Willark car wash. If that's affordable housing, it's not affordable. We need something in the four, five, six range. And is anyone going to develop that? No. It's not profitable. So, I love what you guys are doing, but I think we need to

push back on the state and say, "This is all great theory, boys, but girls, everybody, but it's not deployable and it doesn't fit our needs." Thank you very much. Anyone else in the audience? Pardon me. I said thank you very much. Anyone else in the audience? And anyone online? Okay, with that, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to council for discussion and or a motion. Council member Lopez.

Well, I'm happy to start us off. Um, really, I really do appreciate the uh the public comment and interest on a big issue like this and and I I wish we had more folks out. It's we absolutely need it on a topic like this that concerns um the the the future of Campbell. Um I I just wanted to start by saying and and I meant to address this last comments, but um Rahul, thank you for being here on behalf of ETA. Um, I think our transit agency is absolutely an essential partner throughout this and and I know we've been in close touch. Um, let let's continue to work together. Um, I I I I know um on BTA side that that they're ready um to help. Um I'm not concerned that we're going to close the Hamilton uh light rail. It I mean you will hear that in my comments. I'm focusing more on the light rail stop. And frankly, I think Campbell is unique in that really the line that we're looking at is shaped um much more by the light rail than in other cities where I would say it is much more uncertain. Um uh as the bus lines, not that there are plans to take away those bus lines in those other cities, but just by virtue of the hard infrastructure there, um you have a little bit less certainty. Um I I feel more confidence in in Campbell on the basis of this. That said, the point of this legislation is that the housing should be accessible um by transit, which is why I do support uh this work and I just want to highlight the incredible work once again um of staff. So, um I see I know we have an existing um historic inventory list and it's breezy there to see which houses fall within the circles. I know we have the access points um but it wasn't totally clear to me before um uh Stephen answered my question that every one of those properties in there um is what would be on the exclusion list. So that is an extraordinary amount of work. The fact that you've already followed up with um MTC a bag um to say you know I know the state hasn't finalized the methodology but is this in line with the

direction that you're going in? that's just outstanding and I have no doubt that the work that Campbell is doing will be a model for for many other cities uh doing that. So, um that gives me uh all the greater um uh confidence in in in taking a step and and uh supporting um uh the the this ordinance. Um uh sir or last commenter, I'd say respectfully and highly value your comments. Um, my my my point and where I'm coming from is not to say that um uh you should get a public transit system. Um, but I I I I do think I I I want to respectfully push back just a little bit and say that I do think we have to plan um for uh future generations that will be able to make use of this. And and I just want to share on a personal basis um I take light rail every day to get to work. I go from the the the Campbell stop and um I get off at convention center and and and I I go to work. It's not for everyone. There are many others, you know, and including my own peer group for whom that would not work. Um but on days we're not going to work and we're trying to um go up to a show restaurant with with friends around the Bay Area. Um we're able to take the light rail from from Deiron, my partner and I, and and go around different parts of the Bay Area. So it it's not perfect. It's been a long time coming. It it it should be better. working to make it better. Um, and and and while it it won't be a perfect process, I do see this as part of our responsibility to um start putting the pieces together as best we can. And I'll just go back to my previous comments. I think we get there by engaging more and more. Um, you're right, the city can't do it all alone. The the the state can't just mandate and make it wave a wand and make it perfectly happen. And our transit agencies can't do it by themselves. So, I do think we need the continued engagement. um and in partnership to make sure our community has a voice um and is is at the table. Um absolutely respect the voices um and and I'm glad

we're hearing them um of of people who may have differences um of opinion, but I think it's all valid to get us to to to where we need. And it it it I don't think the goal here is to mandate that that this is uh for everyone and and that this is how everyone's going to live in the future. But for the people who do want to make that choice, um I I I think it's positive to start to um put ourselves out there as someone where people can make this this this lifestyle choice and and start to um to to move in and access jobs, the amenities that that we have in the area. So that's the perspective from which I'm approaching. Not not that it's going to be a wholesale, you know, everyone's going to suddenly want to ride light rail, but but I do see this as an investment um in the future. So with that, deeply appreciate the the comments and and appreciate the work of staff. I will be supporting um this ordinance. I think give us uh more of a a voice and and rightsize this for our community.

Council member Hines,

so I I really appreciate Yeah, you're you're back there. I I very much appreciate the comments. I think that this is going to be one of the uh um the watershed points that uh we as a city and every city um is going to have to be able to manage around. We need housing. Uh there's no question about it and uh being able to uh come up with the balanced way to do it. Um whether or not you know it's a half mile or mile walk um and uh is uh uh is understood. And but I I also want to first uh commend the Stephen and the planning department just a tremendous work on putting this together. Now um in his question as far as use of the use of the light rail uh on Thursday I'm actually going to walk to Costa Mesa the uh League of Cities Housing Community and and uh housing community and economic development uh committee uh that I'm on. And so I uh I'm going to be pushing back on uh and all of the cities are pushing back from that. And what I do is I I walk to the light rail. I'm going to walk take the light rail to Amtrak. Take the Amtrak down to LA. Uh take the coast uh the Surfliner to Costa Mesa uh Thursday. Uh it's going to take a it's going to be a long day, but I I'd like to nap on on trains, too. So um it's uh I am going to be uh I'm going to be doing it. It's an important thing. I enjoy using the family knows that I like big things that move and you know trains, planes and and uh uh boats are are big part of that. So you know coming back that's just the humorous part but the serious part is that um this is this is a mandated requirement from the state

uh and we need to manage to it. We need to be able to make it work within the guidelines that we have uh that are going to be tight and constrained. If we if we don't work to make it work, we're going to get a harder, you know, harder anvil uh thrown at us. So, uh we need to uh we need to come up with the right right approach to it. Uh I believe that the this uh this ordinance reflects the carveouts of the walk and the uh uh the walk and the uh the historical and and I would be in support of that in doing that. Members,

thank you. I'll just excuse me briefly say that I'm going to support the the staff recommendation. I I I agree that we need housing, but development has to be balanced. We can't just um build create 40,000 units in the city. And I mean, that's just to me an unattainable goal. And it's not going to happen in my lifetime. But um I I don't think it's going to happen um beyond that that that amount of I mean our infrastructure can't handle that unless the state provides the money and and the resources in which to to to build that. And so I look at this as one way that the city um can carve out a little bit of protection for our city and um um it's one way that we can push back on on the state and hopefully HCD will approve it and that's all I'll say on that. Um any other comments or questions before I ask for a motion? Yeah, I I you know, just to um give a little bit more more u clarity and and you know, I'm trying to be transparent on again on a personal basis last year. I I really engaged in a lot of conversations about this bill and this provision was not included in the first draft and um I I really brought to the attention of our state legislators that we needed more flexibility um for uh for example historic areas like this that we need to make sure that we couldn't just draw a circle on a map and pretend that that represented real access uh in the real world. So again, it's not perfect, but I think it's an example of what happens when we engage and try to have a voice at the local level. And just thank you again to staff um for for for doing uh this work and I just hope we maintain that attitude of um trying to engage as much as we can to represent our community. So with that I I will move uh this one.

I'll second. Thank you. We have a motion by council member Lopez and a second by council member Hines to approve the staff recommendation. Could we have roll call vote, please? Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Bybeby. I council member Skazola.

One sec.

Okay. Being an interim ordinance of the city council of the city of Campbell identifying specific sites for exclusion from Senate Bill 79 applicability amending section 21.02.02. 02.E conflicting requirements of the Campbell Municipal Code to clarify the applicability of state and federal preeemptions to the zoning code, including as related to the implementation of Senate Bill 79 amending the zoning map to add a reference to historic structures of merit and authorizing submittal to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for statutory review file number PLN 20251 170. Can I have a motion?

I uh a motion to uh not proceed with further reading. Wait, further reading? Whatever the wording is that I need to say. I'll second. Okay. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Vivey. Hi. Council member Scazola. Hi.

And with the mayor's indulgence, I was going to um off for quick recess, five minute recess if that's okay It's all That's

So, we do have a quorum of the council and I'm going to continue the meeting. Is it still Tuesday? I know it was a long discussion. I thank everyone for your patience and for participating in the previous discussions. We now move on to new business and we have uh two items of um three items of new business. So we'll start with uh item 9.2 uh which is the acceptance of fiscal year 2025 uh annual comprehensive financial report uh and the auditor's written communication uh on internal control. Oh, okay. I'm the one that's asleep here. I apologize.

So, we'll consider that second. So, we'll actually go to item 9.1. My apologies. Okay. Um, sorry, Eloisa. Um, the West Valley Homeless Services Feasibility Study. Thank you.

Good evening, mayor, council members. I'm Eloisa Murio Garcia, the housing manager, and the item before you tonight is the West Valley Homeless Services Fisibility Study. Tonight, we'll share updates on the West Valley Homeless Services feasibility study. Um following the study session on the needs analysis held in August 2025, the project team completed the feasibility study which is the study that we have for you. Um we will present key findings of the study and recommendations. Um just wanted to let you know a little bit about the project team. So, in addition to myself and Robbie Squid, our community development director, um we work with the Good City Company consultant team. And tonight, we do have Nick Hamilton, the public policy lead, who was uh the lead on this on behalf of Gibity. uh the recommended actions um before you are to receive the report and to adopt a resolution of intent to support participation in a West Valley Homeless Services implementation task force. And I'll get into that a little bit further as the presentation goes on. So, just to to give you a quick refresher on the timeline, um, back in July of 2024, council allocated $100,000 in American Rescue Plan Act or ARPA funds to conduct a homeless needs analysis and feasibility study for the West Valley region, which includes uh in addition to the city of Campbell, the

cities of Contentino, Saratoga, Monosenino, and the town of Losus. And in December of 2024, the city contracted with good city company uh to complete the study. Um in spring of 2025, the city of Campbell um developed and entered into an with the other West Valley jurisdictions. And this is to recognize that homelessness is a regional challenge and it's best addressed collaboratively. The project consists of two components. Uh phase one was the needs analysis which was completed in the summer of 2025. Um and at that point uh city council held a study session to review the needs analysis findings and to provide feedback. Uh the completed feasibility study builds upon that analysis and evaluates collaborative strategies that the five jurisdictions uh could potentially pursue to more effectively address homelessness across the West Valley. Um so being that we're in phase two, we are here before you tonight. The other cities will be going to their councils in April and May as noted on the screen. So just to let you know what is the purpose of the feasibility study. So the feasibility study opportunities uh for shared service services amongst the five um jurisdictions. Um it's also an opportunity for strengthened regional partnerships and um it provides for alignment of resources and responses to the specific

needs of the inhouse residents in the west county. So just going back a little bit uh just to give you a quick refresher on the needs analysis that we presented in the summer of um 2025. So as you may recall uh there was a pit count or point in time count conducted in 2025 as well as in 2023. So the chart here or the table shows you the the difference between 2023 and 2025. And this is for the whole West Valley region. Um as you can see the West Valley region saw an overall 13% increase from 2023 to 2025 while the county overall increased by 8%. Um the needs analysis in addition to looking at the pit count data also looked at um county homeless services intake data which their data revealed 524 individuals in the west valley across 322 households uh that were identified as being homeless. Um there were approximately 200 new assessments done uh per year. Um approximately 90 of those new intakes were done in the city of Campbell. So that's people that are newly unhoused. The needs analysis also identified some of the unique characteristics of the unhoused population in the west valley.

Uh so that the analysis found that there are more um unhoused youth in the west valley as well as more families with children. Uh the population is more likely to sleep in their car or couch surf. uh there's a higher rate of of the unhoused who are recently unhoused. Um and 51% of the homeless have been homeless for two years or more. Uh the study also found that there's a higher domestic violence survival survivor rate. Uh however, there's a lower mental physical health or alcohol and drug use issues in the West Valley. So now shifting from the needs analysis recap, uh I'm going to get into the results of the feability study. Um the feasibility study analyzes potential policy and program responses to address homelessness in the West Valley area. The study notes that homelessness is complex problem and and investing in preventing housing and homeless services programs can have considerable positive impact on people experiencing homelessness and the community at large. Uh the feasibility study provides an analysis of several homelessness response programs and includes a series of specific recommendations. Um there's a lot more detail within the feasibility study, so I'm not going to get into every single detail but um if you'd like to see more detail that's contained within the study. Uh the feasibility does provide a detailed analysis of several programs which are categorized

into six main categories which are on the screen which are homeless homelessness prevention, outreach and case management, meeting immediate needs, shelter and parking, interim and transitional housing, and permanent housing. this uh table and I don't expect you to read every detail on this table. Um like I said there's a lot more detail contained within the feasibility study itself but this shows those six main categories and then um associated programs uh for each one for so for example for prevention There's a number of different programs under that. Um, but what this does show is, uh, the study did analyze what we call an impact score, which is a composite of three indicators. Um, one being the scale of the current gap. uh second being the short-term impact and third the long-term impact as well as um so looking at impact score and feasibility score. So the feasibility score looked at cost savings as well as cost for the project, the likelihood of obtaining external funding, uh the level of difficulty to implement the program, and the level of of established implementation partnerships. So you can see there's a score assigned for each one of the programs. The study recommends giving attention to those programs that scored both high on

impact and high feasibility. So those that are from in green. However, there may be other reasons to look at other programs that maybe didn't score as high. And while all the the programs that are listed have the ability to tailored to meet the community needs. Um thank you. Sorry my mouth is very dry today. Some programs may be tailored to specific groups such as these specific groups that were identified as um making up the composition of the unhoused in the West Valley area. Uh so for example, rapid re rapid rehousing programs which provide short-term rental assistance could be tailored to prioritize families with children, which is one of the um characteristics that was identified with the needs analysis. for um you know increasing the availability of safe parking programs with access to food, showers and laundry uh to meet the needs of those who are currently sleeping in their cars. So this is just another way to characterize the information that was on a prior table. So this is a a matrix of the different programs So if you look at the the area that's um enclosed by the red box, those would be the programs that were found to be like highest feasibility as well as highest

impact. Uh so again this uh the re the recommendation of the feasibility study is to focus on those that scored both high in feasibility and impact. However, as I mentioned, it is possible to look at other programs that maybe didn't score as high um if there's reason to or interest in exploring other options. So this is a quick recap of the study recommendations. The first one which is to adopt a formal implementation plan. So it's kind of to continue the work that's already been done uh so that this study doesn't just you know kind of sit on a shelf but you know kind of what's the next step. So that would be to adopt a formalmentation plan. Um also to extend sustain and expand what works already. Um so just using the uh tools available to local governments to ensure that continuation of existing services with the proven track record. Um prioritizing additional investments and programs with high feasibility and impact which we've talked about. Um fourth is cultivating partnerships at all levels. Uh so this is uh deploying a holistic approach to engage governments, the private sector, individuals and communities. Um so so just bringing everybody to the table. Um also engaging

with people who have experienced MOS to get their perspective on um you know what what they see as big needs or what programs would be most beneficial. Um the six is to align with the community plan to end homelessness and this is a county plan. um they're currently in the process of updating um the plan, but this serves as a roadmap for ending homelessness throughout the county. Um and we have been collaborating uh with the county on making sure that we share the results of the feasibility study so that they there's alignment between the plans. Um, also identifying funding and finally to support neighborhood health, safety and cleanliness. And this includes addressing quality of life issues for the entire community. So, in order to continue the work, staff recommends that the city council adopt the resolution of intent um supporting the participation in the West Valley Homeless Services and Commentation Task Force. And the proposed task force composition would include representatives from the five jurisdictions as well as county representatives. um other stakeholders and service providers. Uh their proposed responsibilities can include developing a formal implementation plan and establishing measurable goals, defining their structure, financing and monitoring progress. Um

so the next step would be to um to enter into the resolution of intent in this. It's important to note that this is intended to gauge the initial interest amongst all five West Valley jurisdictions uh to participate in the task force. Um following the adoption of the resolution of intent, staff would abstain obtain a scope of services with a consultant to provide technical support to the task force and prepare anou outlining the role of the task force funding needs. Um staff would then return to the five jurisdictions with theou for adoption and subsequently initiate work on the task force. Um, also I just wanted to note the the adoption of the resolution of intent by itself does not commit city to adopt a subsequent MOU. And again, the recommended actions tonight are to receive the report and then adopt the resolution of intent. Um, that concludes our presentation. Um, we're available to answer any questions that you might have. Thank you.

Hello, Lisa. Thank you very much for your presentation. I I will also add at this time to thank the members of the consultant team for the report and the comprehensive nature of the report. So, thank you. Um, comments by members of the council. I have um this is a resolution that we're going to vote on, right? So, I'll um I'll have a couple of comments um when we go to voting, but just questions that I have right now. Um I saw that uh the cities had schedules with the city council except for Certino. Is that right? Did I catch that right?

That is correct. So this in the city of Certino they did prepare um an off agenda memo to the council. So that has been provided to the council and they are pending um further direction from council. So there is no no set council date at this time.

Okay. All right. And then uh you had a uh comment about uh domestic violence. Um can you clarify what the comment that you it I couldn't tell if there was more domestic violence or there was more people that were so amongst amongst the West Valley unhoused population. So we looked at you know are there um kind of unique characteristics that are different in the west valley as opposed to the rest of the county. So what the needs analysis that we did in the summer found that amongst the unhoused in the West Valley,

the incidence of those that were experiencing domestic violence was higher than the rest of the

Thank you. Thank you. And uh just excellent work that you that you did on that and then I've got some other another comments when we go to vote on Um, thank you. Just a couple of questions. First, um, could you define the difference between rapid rehousing, which scored higher in the matrix, um, versus some of the other, for example, temporary shelters or transitional housing? Just what distinguishes that and why was that found to be, um, more impactful in the

Yeah, I may. So, just the definition of rapid rehousing. So that's short-term rental assistance. So um so typically it's kind of time limited. So uh a household is given a unit um at a reduced rental rate, but it's term limited term limited as opposed to permanent supportive housing. So that's the but how's that different from either transitional housing or temporary shelters as an example? not comparing it to permanent solution.

Yeah. So, transitional housing, and I may call on Nick on this, uh, but I believe that's even a shorter stay than rapid rehousing and interim sites. Uh, that's more like your um shorter term shelter. Yeah. And and what about temporary shelters? How's that different? So temporary shelter um Oh, how is that different than interim rapid rehousing?

So yeah, so temporary shelter would be more of your shorter term. Maybe it's a 30-day stay. So it's it's more limited. So So rapid rehousing is more or less permitted limited than temporary shelter and transitional housing.

No. So rapid rehousing is typically a lighter stay. So, I I've seen it it varies depending on the program, but it could be up to two years of assistance. Whereas a temporary shelter, those stays are usually limited, maybe around 30 days. Some of them can go a little bit longer, but they're typically a much shorter stay than rapid rehousing. It's um it provides a little bit more stability for a longer term. Like I said, I've seen it two years, sometimes beyond that. And would rapid rehousing be more like um assistance to pay for it as opposed to the city putting up like quick build shelters which would fall under interim sites.

Uh yes. So rapid rehousing uh what the way I'm familiar with it is um say through the office the county office of supportive housing where when they build new um permanent supportive housing units. Uh sometimes they do put in they have a set aside for rapid rehousing. So it would be specific to uh certain units within a larger project.

Okay. and and under this um if the council or the West Valley cities were to explore this, would it be um I I I guess what what would that that look like? And I'm I'm just focusing on this one because it's it's one of the highest in in the matrix and just I think just in the conversation the news for I think we tend to be more familiar with things like interim sites and transitional housing. So just to make sure it's understood, what would that look like for the city or cities or some kind of effort to support that?

Yeah. So I I think it could take on a little bit, you know, some different form. So like I said with the county program, they set aside a certain number of units and in their new or they did in their new measuring projects for example and those units would be set aside as rapid reducing units. Uh but I have also seen it as more of a subsidy that's provided to a household that they can use at a um at an apartment that's not designated specifically as a rapid housing unit, but they are still provided that subsidy for say two years. So it could take on different forms.

Great. Thank you. Yeah, that that's really helpful and again I'll reserve my comments. Um but um thank you for that and um just My next question, thank you council member Hines for u noting just the the schedule and the timing for it to come before some of the other councils. Um how do you envision that structure uh working if if we as a council were to move forward with this and assuming the other jurisdictions do whether it's the other four or let's say it's it's uh three of them um would that task force need to um be unanimous for example in supporting something or or could we as a city adopt our our own programs and and I'm not advocating for one or the other I'm just envisioning how the task force would.

Sorry. So, just to make sure I understand your question. So, you're saying if if not all the cities signed on, so like three cities, either if they don't sign on or if they do sign on, but uh let's say three of them really want to go with something or two of them and the others aren't interested. What that structure kind of look like?

Probably director. Uh I think safe answer is we have to see how many cities sign on. Obviously five city sighting on is a better approach. The premise on the west valley feasibility study and the premise for this is that five cities work together you share costs of scale if we go through this iteration and let's just theoretically three cities sign up. I I you know we would assess um obviously that the costs would be higher per city but I I think from staff's perspective there's still economy of scale or cities working together on this still probably return to the cities that are willing uh with approach andou to see if they will hold it comes down to Campbell only that's a whole different story

and and what about the case let's say all five say sign on or or it's four put that aside for a second but there's not unanimous consent consensus on a particular approach, how would we as a city protect our interests if we want to do something? So, let me just jump in. The council always retains discretion on our own programs regardless of the recommendations of the task force or lack of recommendations. We would still have discretion.

Great. Great. Um, that's that's helpful because I assume a task force is more flexible and I I support it conceptually more flexible than like a JPA, which uh I I wouldn't recommend it at this stage. Um, but that's a little bit more clear-cut to me in terms of a decision-m process as opposed to so helpful. Thank you. Yeah. Um, I'll reserve my comments. Appreciate. Thank you. Other questions. I will ask if there is any public comment. Seeing none, uh, I will, um, close public comments and, uh, come back to council. What, uh, What is your pleasure?

I would like to make a motion if everyone's had our proper discussion questions answered. I would like to before we vote on a motion, I'd like to make some comments. Sure.

Like you'd like to um that um from the from the aspect of uh the prioritization that you that you listed uh the bullet points the the point number seven of funding. I I think that that's the the crux um of being able to do it and I think we need to look really closely at the county uh for participation in that funding. Um I've talked with the uh uh Santa Clair County Office of Support of Housing. You know, they they've got an outreach program where they can do outreach to hotspots. Uh I I think we really want to be able to incorporate that into it. you know, sadly and I've talked to a number of city council members from the other cities. Um, we need to be we need to be prepared. You know, I I definitely would love to be able to do do it um with all five. Uh, but I think we need we have a problem uh that we need to address and so we got to figure out how to do it. So, I really want us to be able to look at at funding. I als in in that I think we need to be careful about how we present this as a plan. be because it is a plan that needs funding. Uh I have heard from our supervisors uh county supervisors that uh Campbell doesn't need homeless uh support funding because we have a plan. Well, we we don't well well we do have a plan, but we need funding to deliver that plan. So, I think we want to really make sure we articulate our conversations so that it's uh uh really emphasizing being able to get funding from these organizations. Uh and you I think you've included some of the Silicon Valley at home. They've got some real continuity of affordability and uh tenant protection emphasis that u that I I saw in there. I think that's uh that's

really good. Uh where we can really focus on state and Santa Clara County procedures that uh that can be utilized for that. So uh I think we need to come up with a a realization that we may be sailing alone on this too. And and if that's the case, we have to we have to solve it for Campbell. It'd be great if we could solve it for all of West Valley, but I think we want to make sure that we're thinking about the the way to be able to do it if we're alone in that process, but I'll uh offer it for any other questions.

Thank you. I I realize this is a very complex issue. It's a challenging issue for all of California, I assume, throughout our country as well. Um I do see two major areas. one temporary housing which we probably have the greatest success for finding vouchers and some things like that. But of course that is really only temporary and the biggest challenge and the biggest problem. Something that we really should try to solve if we can is of course the long-term housing. But with long-term housing comes additional support measures in particular that are needed. Job skills, um health care, dental care, um just a variety of things. Um but I think we need to forge ahead as best we can and do what we can. Um you know we always hear a lot of comments about people gee you have to solve that problem but oh maybe over on this part but not in my part of the town or something you know so finding locations is a challenge it will be. So we'll just have to kind of do our best I think. Um but certainly this is a start and uh hopefully if we can bring in other cities and work jointly on some of these measures obviously it'll be better.

Yes.

So so thank you for the excellent work and thank you to our consultant team. I I know and because I've been at some of the outreach meetings I know how extensive the work beyond this uh or I should say leading up to this um has been how much has gone into it. Um I I Um, I've gone into this with an uh open mind to really see what the data shows us. The same exact thing when um we we saw the earlier report in terms of what the initial data showed. Um, and in in some cases it's it's tested what just my assumptions would be just as a lay person or just walking down the street um and encountering some of these things. So um uh one of them being the the rates of uh domestic violence for example and really being targeted to to that community. Um the high impact of uh prevention and and uh really um as I see it building out the safety net to prevent people falling into homelessness who are on the brink as one of the the uh just um greatest bang for your buck that that that you could get. Um, coming out of this now, something that I necessarily expect is the importance and the impact of food, showers, and laundry. Um, not something that I would have thought of just with with my my own experience, but that now that I I hear that, of course, that would be impactful to someone falling into these situations make a huge difference in their lives for um relatively much less uh money than than um some some other interventions. Um and and since this and since we last had the presentation on this, um I I heard the um uh numbers in San Jose for for their prevention and and rental assistance interventions and just how incredibly cost effective those have been. So um the numbers may be slightly different in our case, but it really is some of the the greatest just in terms of every dollar you put in, the the um amount that you save versus if

someone um were on the street. So, um I I I think the where we zeroed in on the quadrant and the matrix uh makes a lot of sense. Um I think it is targeted our community. Um Council Hines, your comments are very well said and I I do hope we can set ourselves up for for success by having as much participation um as possible, but we we should be flexible. I think one thing that would help with that is not to present this as a done deal, but really as something that the task force is going to engage with and come up with something that that really uh makes sense. I I think that's going to be much more appealing than saying, "Hey, this a scam plan and um take it or leave it, which I don't think is what we're saying, but I'm just saying in terms of how we present this and and the continued engagement, I think will be valuable." Um you know, and it's a great point about county representatives. I would also add something I wasn't thinking until I I heard my colleagues comments just now um perhaps also including um our state and federal representatives, representatives from their staff on the task force because that can be really crucial sources of funding um once they see how uh substantive uh uh this is I think would be really valuable. And then going broader with um uh institutional stakeholders. So, I I love community college district representatives because um it it is an increasing problem of student homelessness. Um I would also say um our our waterboard representatives um who are seeing this as an impactful issue and I think would be interested in having local jurisdictions um take an active approach because they're limited in what they can do. um but they do have large budgets and potentially resources that they can share as part of these efforts because we we can make interventions um that they may not be able to. So I would say go broad uh initially with the task force, see what the interest is and and uh just frankly to to see what other sources of funding um we can pull in so that while I'd love the economies of scale to cities, I I I think we'll need um something beyond

just what we can do on our own. But thanks for the work. I I do fully support the staff recommendation. and I think it's it's very thoughtful and I don't have anything to to add to it. Thank you. I will say um with respect to the community college housing uh West Valley Mission College District is very uh much supportive of building housing for students. Um they have u additional property available I think and they are looking forward to hopefully doing that. I'm not sure about the their funding source but uh their first step is agreeing that they need it and they want to build it if they can. Yeah. Yes.

So I for for my perspective um in my seven years on the council I feel like we have been sailing along on the homeless issue. Um it's a it's a countywide uh problem and it needs to be addressed but not one city can can solve the problem. It has to be a collaborative collective um effort and and I I just don't see that happening um in my perspective. And so when the money was allocated for this study um using the ARPA funds, I was very um enthused and and um happy that we were doing an analysis and then following up with the feasibility study with our hopefully with our West Valley cities so that we could come together and really have a meaningful discussion about what what we as individual but collective cities can do to to put a dent in it or at least address some of the issues that are mutual to our community. So, I I think the purpose of the task force is to bring them together and find out if if we can share resources, if if they're um programs or or attainable goals that we we can um produce and and really say, gee, we we we made a difference or we had an impact in that. And I I think it also helps um having a collective group especially in the area of trying to um advocate and leverage funding that um that we may be able to get through the state or the federal um one city alone isn't going to get much. But if you have a collective group, uh I I think that's more meaningful. And I I think that's the purp that to me was the purpose of the of creating the the task force. So I appreciate all the work that's gone into it. And I really do hope that the other four four cities in West Valley really come to the table and and try and have a meaningful discussion with us because I I do think we need to do something.

Uh if no one else has any more comments or discussion, I'd love to make the motion to adopt the resolution of intent to support participation in West Valley Homeless Services implement implementation task force. A second. We have a motion by council member Skazola. Second by council member. If there's no further discussion, roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member. I. Council member Skazola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi. Thank you. Thank you very much.

We now move to um item number 9.2 to uh that I mentioned earlier, the annual comprehensive financial report and the auditor's written communication. And I'd like to ask assistant finance director Nordy Vaughong to make the staff presentation.

Good evening, council. Um, Mayor Fado, council members, I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you tonight. Um, I will be presenting item number 9.2, the acceptance of the fiscal year 2025 annual comprehensive financial report and the auditor's written communication on internal controls. As you're aware, um, on an annual basis, the finance department is responsible for preparing financial statements. And per city municipal code, uh, we're required to have an independent auditor um, review our financial statements to ensure that the internal controls, our processes, and our policies are all adequate and they're effective. They also ensure, our auditors also ensure that the financial statements are fairly presented and without material misstatements. Um, this year, as with the prior five years, um, We've had ID Billy as our auditor and our partner on the engagement here is Ahmad um who's also here to assist if there are any questions that you might have. Um at the beginning of the audit uh staff provides our auditors um the June 30, 2025 figures um for all the various funds that we have within the city. Um and here um on this slide I have the highlights of the general fund uh figures as of June 30, 2025. Um revenues um for the general fund excluding transfers were $68 million and that increased $4.9 million year-over-year. Um expenditures excluding transfers uh were $64.5 million and that increased by $3 million year-over-year. um revenues overall exceeded expenditures um and the general fund fund balance increased by $5.4 million to an amount of $26.4 million at fiscal year end. Um as you're aware, two of the large

reserve accounts that we have within general fund is the economic fluctuation reserve as well as the emergency reserve. the economic fluctuation reserve is to be utilized um in certain instances such as the emergency reserve as well. Um for the e economic fluctuation reserve it's for economic downturn for the emergency reserve it's for emergency purposes in fisc 25 um we did not utilize either reserve. So both u amounts remain unchanged from the prior year uh which is $9.5 million for the economic fluctuation reserve and $3.2 2 million for the increase reserve. At the conclusion of the audit, uh the city received an unmodified clean opinion which is the highest opinion that we could have in terms of uh there were no findings, no issues determined within the uh the course of the audit. Uh staff presented to the finance subcommittee uh the audit process, the financial statements. Um the finance subcommittee is comprised of Mayor Certado and council member Lopez and questions and that that staff received was in relations to the general fund reserve ratio uh which is currently above GFO best practices. Um there were questions about the pers reserve calculation of our compensated apps and balances as well as OPED liability. Um the finance subcommittee was uh satisfied with the presentation answers provided by by the auditors and staff. Um and with that uh finance subcommittee and staff recommends that the city council accept the fist 2025 annual comprehensive financial report and the auditor's written control written communication on internal controls. And with that I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you Nordie. Um questions by members of the council. Oh, sorry.

Just outstanding work. Uh again on from a finance standpoint, uh obviously uh you know I've been through many audits and uh having no findings is you know you you have to go into it assuming you're not going to get any findings and just outstanding work that there were no findings. So great work on that. I will ask if there's any members of the public that would like to comment on this. Uh seeing none, come back to the council. Let me also note I want to thank the auditor for your patience. Uh it turned out to be this is one of our longest meetings. So you picked I'm sorry the long meeting to attend. So thank you however for being here. Thanks.

What is the pleasure of the council? You have I'm sorry. I did ask that there is a I uh I I propose a motion to accept the fiscal year 2025 annual comprehensive financial report and auditor's written communication on internal control. I'll second motion by council member Hines, second by council member by roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member BY. Hi. Council member Scazola. Hi. Mayor Fado.

Hi. Again, thank you very much. We now move to um another fiscal matter item 9.3, which is the fiscal year 2026 midyear financial update and budget adjustments. And I believe um director uh Will Fuentes is going to make the Uh good evening council. I'm here um to approve. I am here to approve resili update. Um it uh it it It takes a our a year of today our year date of let's go results uh through uh through through the end of December and it uh it compares um both our command expenses through the end of December. um to uh to the uh budget. Um also the uh the year uh to date uh the year to date actual amounts of the uh prior year. Um also a a a comparison against our uh budget. Um and also uh

take some on the uh uh trends. Um and also a discussion amongst the ex among their ex active uh team and outside consultants. Um to hijack out our our expenses uh through the end of the end of the year um and the end of June. Um the the main focus of of the Aurora, the main focus of the work is um the general fund. um of but um they also um I'll show um adjustments to the um budget of funds outside of the uh general fund and those adjustments are called for. Um, I um I I I will again mind the uh council and the uh public. Um that the uh current um adopted a budget for FY uh 26 has um include a three points. 3.7 million of a war of a war on time and a

shortterm uh corrective actions um to um ensure that that the adopted budget did uh become a balance. Um I'll um I'll I'll I'll give a a few um a um a general fund notes um in our in our income accounts. Um they um a a crew had a a 3.03% rate over over the same time time periods. um the prior year. Um there um there there there were um income streams that out outperformed um usually in our property taxes, our licenses and upcom and also our rentals. Um there were also there were also areas that under outperformed um either either due um to a a certain of slowdowns in the economy or also a a big uh companies who are with Campbell. Um so things that uh under perform were a

thousand a stats are taxes um that include a t and tax. Um also a a third um inter intergovern inter intergovernmental accounts um for either grants or otherwise um and also a a charters or charters or charters for purposes as well. Um in in a uh terms of expenses um a a slight aum% increase over the uh priority. So it's overall it's a a a slow expendure growth um due to um and this um and access some of well an unexpected um an unexpected amount of of an unexpected amount of accuracies. um and also um to the uh uh the um budget um corrections that we did put in into place up front. Um are also built um there were also built unexpected

expenses either in uh in increasy or repair expenses. Um a um an an um an increase also in our out in our alpha time responses. um are a lot are a are a cost um uh due to some cases um that are uh current currently underway um also in uh claims. Um but um due to um the the excess um um amount um that we a a curly showing or vacancy a savings. Um if if if we shift a a a certain um amount um up to a point a million in a total um that's also detailed in um attachment three um her um still able we're still able to be a balance in the uh general fund. Oh. Um. Um, do you um propose that council approve um all of the adjustments in three um to ensure that that in the uh

general fund that they are still a balance in the uh year. Um, so we recommend that council accept the order. um and also um approve on the the um budget adjustment shown. Um there are also some alternatives as well as shown. Um and with that I will take a question. Thank you.

Thank you. Will questions board members? Yeah. Can you go back to your uh the other one more? There we go. Uh right there that uh you implemented 3.75 short-term strategies. Your revenues was up um three quarter 3/4 million. So that leaves 3 million. You've got a million dollar coming from the excess vac savings. That leaves about two million. Um, was that It sounds like that was the emergency repairs and overtime.

No, no. Um, oh. Um, a theor is hot. the council um approved in uh June um under our under the adopted budget. Um but in in terms of overtime ex expenses over and above um I I would need to check the details of that but um as I call there in the two to 800 of two to 3000 for the housing range. Um, and it's a it's it's also a a due to um that um there are there are unexpected openings. Um so if if there are open jobs and oftent times um a a a way to still get it done work done.

Very good. Thank you on that. Um what you said the uh excess vacancy savings is that the jobs the vacant jobs is that what you

so um under our uh budget hey um Assume um that in in any um a year um there'll probably be um a certain a certain a certain degree of turnover either um due um due to um people taking uh jobs elsewhere um due to a retirements. And so a typically will it's um assume that um there there there will be about a a two a 2% turnover rate um and that it's it's a thing that you aren't able um to access. I mean you don't know You don't know people or a tire but it's um typically 2% um so whatever um paid from shown is overended above that

very good thank you that's all there's no other questions anymber of the public wish to comment on this item. Seeing none, come back to the council and be prepared to take a motion.

Any comments? I'll propose a motion to accept the fiscal year 2026 midyear financial update and budget adjustments. I'll second motion by council member Hines. Second by council member Lopez. Roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. I council member By. Council member Skazola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi. Will. Thank you very much. Thanks to the members of your department also.

Thank you. Thanks again. I appreciate it. And also too. We now move on to um unfinished business item number 10. And first of all uh item number 10.1 the adoption of the fiscal year 2027 council priorities. Um these are the priorities based on our workshop discussion uh about council's priorities that we had recently and um our city manager Brian Levventhal will make the presentation. Uh thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the council. Um that introduction uh was was was well done. Um we met with the council on March 5th to talk about priorities in a study session and we spent a few hours kind of going through where we've been. Um staff provided a look ahead and what they thought was important going forward. certain as part of that discussion, the council provided their own thoughts of what was important to them going forward. Um, what I've reflected in the staff report is those comments as best I could and I've spoken with each of you and and perhaps in some of those areas I took a little bit more liberty than perhaps was intended by the council members with the wording. So, I'm glad to clarify that if necessary. Um it was a difficult job to take the comments of council members um understand the intent and sort of um reward it as necessary to sort of make this consistent in the format that we're providing it to you here. Uh it wasn't an intent to censor or change the council members intents. So in the staff report uh we list the strategic objectives um the council priorities and then the comments by council members. the council priorities is being proposed

uh and it was my understanding that there's still some support uh for those include long-term land use planning and housing, city infrastructure, financial stability, sustainability, and community health and safety. Those are the priorities that we're asking the council to consider for adoption this evening. the council member comments are a way to reflect what was uh important or said by council members so we don't lose that information and then after tonight the the the hard work is is really uh yet to come in which uh I'll work with the staff uh on not just these coun these council member comments but everything else that staff had mentioned at the pardon setting plus everything else we have to get done and develop proposed work plans for the next fiscal And when we develop those work plans, we'll come back to the council in May. I think May 5th, we have a study session for the budget in which we will present those draft work plans that hopefully will reflect council member comments or uh in some cases it may not. And where it doesn't, we will either explain why we didn't do that. Uh was it lack of resource or was it uh clear that there wasn't council support for it in some cases? Um, but most of these cases, we haven't gone through and adjudicated each council member comment, and I'm not expecting the council members to do that this evening. We'll certainly take feedback if you want to provide it. But it's our job as staff then to take that and develop a budget from it, develop the work plans and the budget, which is the resources needed to execute those work plans and propose those to the council. Um, and the council will have an opportunity to agree, disagree, add, delete, change those work plans and budget items at that May 5th meeting. Um, so tonight I'll stop there and I'm certainly willing to take questions or

elaborate on my editing of council members comments if that's appropriate. Uh, but really the action we're asking council take is to um by motion um vote to approve the priorities as proposed. Thank you, Brian, for your report and u for the staff's um input when we did have our priority setting and likewise your effort to try to capture comments that we made during that time as well. Uh first I'll ask if there's any questions by members of the council.

Thank you, Mayor Fado. Uh so uh my understanding is that yes we had the meeting and we were heard and that was the encapsulation of of what was heard at that meeting but I just wanted to do some brief reminders uh that there was a request for information. And I just want to make sure that we get that before the May 5th uh meeting specific information regarding certain things like um uh lobbying policy, the transparency. Uh there was requests for more information on that. Uh as well as the responsible construction ordinance, those two I know for sure were. So uh when may we the question is when may we actually see our council receive this information? Oh, I believe there's also a question perhaps on rent stabilization. I'm trying to remember that myself, but um yeah, so that's my question is when when can we the the requested information during the priority setting session? Uh when do you predict we'll we'll get that from staff?

So, let me just clarify for a moment and I I could stand to be corrected by the council. Um, with regard to the responsible construction ordinance, I did hear council uh uh express interest in more information. We'll provide an information memo uh with uh some basic information of uh what some of the other cities have done in that area and we'll provide that before the May 5th date. Um to be honest, I don't know that I heard um a majority of the council interested more information about lobby. Um and uh it may have been ask that question.

Well, we can I'm just just clarifying what I understood and if you need to be clarified, we can do that. Uh and I'm not sure it was clear on the rent control either. Um but uh I was clear on the responsible construction work. So I just wanted to just clarify his point. Oh, and uh and and I just want to also confirm that uh when we're talking about the wonderful things that staff is already looking into regarding uh ICE and what they can do in our city and things of that nature, uh the No Secret Police Act was uh struck down in the courts, but uh we have potential that we can add on something. I believe San Jose has a policy. I believe there was uh consensus on that one as well and that we need more information on that one as well. I forgot to mention that earlier specific to the, you know, similar to the no secret police act like like the San Jose.

We already have an agenda item that'll be coming to the council uh the second meeting of April regarding immigration policies that should sue that. Um so I I didn't address that. I appreciate that. Thank you. I believe that's for now. Yes.

Yeah. I just wanted to emphasize that I don't think we should leave the uh environment and sustainability blank. So um I think that uh um there's a you know there's an excellent cap program that uh the plan that has been put together. I guess the one suggested work plan is to find some components of that that can be implemented uh maybe in concert with MRP 4.0 no really focusing on carbon reduction and and solar use. Uh so just so that it's not blank because I I I don't think that was the intent with our uh agreement to move up ahead with the CAP plan.

So I I will say just because we didn't have specific comments on that doesn't mean it's still not a priority. It doesn't mean that staff still won't have work plans to deal with that. I would just simply reflect in discussion, but we we can reflect um the climate action plan. Clearly, we're working on to complete that this fiscal year and we'll look at low hanging fruit. Yeah. I just didn't want it to go out to the public with a blank. Yeah. Um I can reflect the climate action plan. Great. Thank you.

I might ask if I might ask if um there are any members of the public that wish to speak. Uh there is. Okay. Okay, I will um I'd like to call Louise uh our home.

Good evening, council members. I'm Luis Hourhan. I'm the director of economic and workforce policy at Working Partnerships, who are a community organization here in Santa Clara County. Um, and I just wanted to speak to the interest in responsible construction policies. Um, I spent the past 15 plus years leading workforce and development initiatives for the construction industry here in Santa Clara County. So, it's wonderful to see you all taking it up. So, I'm here to encourage you to adopt this as one of your priorities to look into this year and to offer our support and my support um in looking at some of those existing policy models in different cities around the county. And also, I want to raise there are a couple of models that address different segments of the construction industry and how they've worked on the ground for workers and for contractors. Um, and this, you know, this is really a big part of what I do. So I'm always happy to share those resources. Um and I'll mention when we started this work some 15 years ago, it was in response to seeing a major challenge in our region construction sector. At that time labor market data revealed that our metro region had proportionately more lowincome construction workers than any other in the state. Over half of all construction workers in the county were earning less than a livable wage working but in poverty. Um there was con really a two-tier industry in construction Silicon Valley. Um and that was starting to generate workable shortages. You know, who wants to invest 5 10 years of your life in something that's not going to pay? Uh and so that's where construction career policies came in. Um, and fast forward to today, over 20 jurisdictions in the county passed policies for project labor agreements on their public works projects to ensure job quality and worker protections. And public works projects are a great place to start. Um, and I see my time is a

little shorter than I thought, so I'll stop here, but happy to share more. And just to say that there's two distinct types of policies, and I think Ruth will talk about the second type. Thank you. Thank you. I would like to invite uh Ruth Silver toe.

Hello. Um I'm the supervising attorney of the workers rights practice at the Alexander Community Law Center. Also supervisor attorney of the office of labor standards enforcement legal advice line. I coordinate a wage theft coalition and I'm legal service provider co-chair and uh of the South Bay Coalition 10 human trafficking and I sit on the commission. I'm speaking today in favor of the responsible construction ordinance and I urge you to adopt it as a priority. It's been adopted as you know in other cities. Wage theft is rampant in the construction industry and labor trafficking is also prevalent. Uh our the wage theft coalition 2021 report found 12,376 Santa Clara County construction workers who's been victim of wage theft. The notorious silvery towers labor traffic or as we call it slavery towers labor trafficking case involve construction workers. Um the ordinance is really critical. Um it's aimed at private construction. It has no impact on single family home construction or home improvement. It was enacted to provide an additional tool for construction workers. Right now once you go to the labor commission which now takes three to four years. Once you go through a hearing then the uh judgment is recorded in superior court. It has the same force and effect as any other judgment and only according to the recent auditor's report only 12% were ever paid. So it's really really necessary and what this does is it requires these judgments to be paid in order for a certificate of occupancy to issue on the project and it it's

complaintbased which is very important. Um, the city doesn't have to do anything at all.

Thank you for your presentation. I had one other card from Susan Landry, but she appears to have left. Uh, and there's no one else online, I guess. Not. Okay. All right. Uh, thank you. Um, so I'm prepared for council discussion or a motion. Yeah. So, I just want to thank staff for bringing the report back to us and it's um I think we the discussion that we have is pretty well reflected in the comments that have been uh included in the report and I just want to state for the record that I did not support um the lobbying ordinance or the rent stabilization ordinance. I I didn't ask that that be moved forward.

Sorry. Should we have some clarification? Because my understanding was it seemed like the majority was on the side of both of those issues from my understanding from the meeting that we hadn't I reviewed the transcript and everything. Uh so can we just have some clarity on on those two items right now? I ask each member. I am of course supportive of both of those things. Yes. Can I just keep going with my comments? I address that my comments. Um I I I don't recall um if there was a specific consensus, but I know that I personally addressed the the lobbying policy and my own comments were that was open to it, but I suggested that if we're going to think about it to minimize the impact to to staff um uh was that this be considered um when we review the council uh conduct policy, which we do on an annual basis. Um So, I I don't know if that's scheduled to fall before the May 5th date, but that was my suggestion to um ju just make that um a little bit easier. Um I am interested in looking um at a responsible u uh wage policy and in considering that. I think I I will say with any of these um look forward to the staff input and analysis on um what the the staff time costs, etc., timing, schedule, all that will be, which is a part of our process. Um, but but I have been interested in um looking that I really appreciate the public commenters and the resources being offered um uh to shape that. I I think uh there there's tremendous value to having uh labor piece on on projects and just a level playing field. Um, so I'd be interested in looking that in a thoughtful manner um along with the work which of course

already is substantial but the the the work that our planning department is doing um to look at our pro housing uh policies and and seeing if it uh makes sense. But um I think there are models where um that can very much um uh be as spur to uh make it easier to provide a more level uh playing field for for housing uh production. Um I I did want to comment that the and it's not a knock against uh staff. I've already shared this with Brian. Um I thought the notes were accurate for the most part. The main thing that I saw missing was that I did feel strongly about the feedback offered by uh police chief Gary Berg about the the need to be a little bit proactive um with um not even necessarily expanding but just uh retaining the workforce that we have there in our police department. and uh feeling that we need really need to take seriously a serious look at that um just so that um as a relatively small department we we don't lose um a huge chunk of our workforce um in in the coming years. Um, and I think staff understood this, but also wanted to just contextualize my comments for um, um, under long-term land use planning and housing. Um, and just be really candid that um I I I think uh we are significantly um understaffed um in in our community development department to meet the needs of what we've already put on the table, let alone the state mandates um for housing and the commitments that that we've made. Um so I I just I really want to make sure that's right size. I think that was understood in the discussion, but just just wanted to further um emphasize that. Um, other than that, um, really supportive of the notes, supportive of the comments staff made. Um, and, uh, Council Hines, I shared just the the feeling of not wanting it to seem like we don't care about

sustainability, but I think the point is well taken that um, there are staff work plan items associated with that that I think we were um, in support of. Similarly, I had a member of the public um, ask this and so just wanted to put it um, on the record. um you didn't see more discussion or it's not reflected in the notes of uh as much of the importance um of infrastructure uh such as our community uh uh our community center um or or or the pool or city hall. I did just want to again note for the record that we had a study session devoted to those items. I I think there was a consensus around them and so that is probably why in these particular notes that you're seeing um that is not further reflected but again because I received that question from the public um doesn't mean that we're not focused on on that as a city um was was my understanding. Um so that was really just one I wanted to emphasize but I look forward to continuing through this process as we do budgeting.

Yes.

Yeah. I just want to emphasize that as I look through the the list that you had, I felt that that accurately reflected uh with the exception of fill in the blanks based on the uh the environment and sustainability. you know, on uh on the land use, maybe it's too tactical, but um but filling the wastelands and the fire department buildings. Um we're it's it's probably a more of a work plan uh description in there, but uh that's such a and it's such an eyesore and it's the the wastelands are the fire department buildings are are uh highly touted, but we need to be able to maintain those. But uh beyond that, I think it accurately reflected the points that I made.

Thank you. Yes.

Yeah. Just a couple follow-ups real quick. Uh so, uh regarding rent stabilization, obviously we've had a lot of discussions about housing and different things we can do. We talked about this uh several times at least. Uh last year, I'll remind you that we did get the statistics. uh we got a report that there was a 17% rise in rent over the last two years. That was I believe late last year when we got that report. So that would be what uh 20 24 and 25 those two years. Uh so 17% rise in rent. I asked all the council members if they thought just a simple yes or no if that was too much. Uh three out of the four of you said yes that's too much. So to me that's kind of consensus in a way that we must do something about it and we are doing a lot of things about it. that I feel that uh this is a very necessary thing. And also I'd like to allow council member Lopez to answer. Last time you did not answer. Do you think 17% rise in rent is too much?

I'm focused on the discussion on our website. Just a yes or no.

No. Okay. All right. All right. So I will move on to the lobbying policy. So this is about transparency. People are crying out for transparency. Uh the so this is something that we again much like the responsible construction ordinance there's tons of examples all around us that we can pull from. It will not take too much time and I did feel that there was a general sense and that's why I'm asking can I get a yes or no from each of you to see if there is still a majority that I felt there was that we'd at least get the information that that's all I'm asking for here is that the lobe policy we see other cities in our region that have them already and we can uh have a discussion about after we have the information. So uh simply raise your hand say yes. I'm going to reiterate what uh um council member Lopez said that I'm focused on the priorities that are listed there and uh I want to emphasize to the staff

let me finish please and emphasize to the staff that that reflects the comments that uh I I made during the during the priority session. Well, I I don't I have the transcript and there was at least two others that were saying I would like more information on this to be provided. So is is the information is it being provided to us about the specifically the lobbying policy Brian is there information being provided in the I haven't heard direction from the council

okay well that's what I'm asking because during the priority session it seemed like there was a majority that was asking for at least the information uh to consider not that we're going to go for it but at least you just have the information which would be relatively little staff time because there's so any examples around this? Do we still have at least a couple other people besides myself looking in to have the information provided at least to to have a discussion about it? If if I could add on to that, I I don't really see that there's an issue with lobbying in the city of Campbell and really that there's a need for a lobbying ordinance and some of the cities that you referred to that have ordinances are actually charter cities where they're not governed by the the general um general law and and so that's the basis that I'm not supporting it because I don't believe we have a problem here and it's up to each individual council member to um to to disclose when they have discussions with developers and and um it's again I if there's a problem I don't see people bringing it to our attention.

Okay, fair enough. But I I would say that it's kind of an honorbased thing that we have here. And so if you're a dishonorable person or it slips your mind, maybe it just slips your mind, but you know if we just you know I've seen it before we have to declare, oh yes, I met with that person and that's it. It's just like yes, I met and you don't have to really go into details or anything. So, what I'm asking here is I just want to provide the information. You might change your mind if you see the information. So, are you accusing one of us or any people?

I'm not accusing anybody. I'm saying maybe it could be future councils or maybe there was past members. Uh it doesn't matter. I'm just trying to provide the security. It's nothing personal. It's just I'm trying to provide the security. I think this is very important for future generations, for future councils and our own council perhaps. Uh yeah, it's not meant to be pointing at anyone specifically. I don't want that to be interpreted. I just think this is something that public is crying out for more transparency.

Yeah. Make a comment to that that uh um I spend an inorbit amount of time filling out my my FPPC uh documentation very accurately and very completely. And should I have and I've done this. Should I have any discussion with any um anybody that's having a pertinent I disclose it. So I I think council member Skazola, you should look look at that information and see that uh from my perspective that uh that handles all of that uh for uh being able to convey that.

Well, it I appreciate that and of course we all do that. We we are uh uh to the law. We do this. But here's the thing. Let's not be fools about this. People make secret deals all the time. This is what people are sick of, you know. I mean, I won't go into it. This is not supposed to be a stump speech. But I think it's actually pretty ignorant to just It's not about this council. Remember, I can't overstate that enough. I'm not accusing anyone or anything like that. I'm just trying to ensure that we have much more teeth because when it's a simple honorbound thing which is more or less we have besides yes we fill out some paperwork so whatever but uh what I'm talking about is something more specific where you have to file a simple paper that says who you met with what you were talking about when where simple b uh information very simple for any of us just yes another form that's what we sign up for right one more form for us whenever we meet with people That's all I'm asking for. But I want it to have teeth. I want it to be have severe consequences like the stripping of your committees, something like that if you don't report if it's found out that you had a meeting with someone and you didn't report it. I want people to be afraid. I want electeds to be afraid here in Campbell of speaking to someone and not letting the public know about it. That's all. That's what I'm asking. It's transparency. That's all I'm asking them. And I'm just asking for the information for us to review.

I I think members of the council have had a chance to say something if they wanted to. I don't think there's any further com. I I will say that um likewise I did have a card here from Susan Landry to comment on this item as well, but again she's not here. Is there anyone else that I I I was trying to just kind of be general about this, but I I spoke with Susan and her it was a question and it was about why infrastructure and the community center and so on were not part of the priorities. Um so I was trying to address that in my comments just for any members of the public who

yeah I spoke with her briefly. she said she had. So, I just wanted to

um and and I'll just say as a a closing comment, well, you know, specifically on on the lobbying, I'm open to discussion at the appropriate time. It's it's um it's okay and I understand everyone's different uh feelings, but I will say just as a general comment uh where I'm coming from and where I think staff is coming from, where I think we should really focus our efforts for any of these priorities is to see what actually impacts the city of Campbell and is before us and to focus on on that because there's a number of issues that are of general concern to the nation that um don't necessarily make sense for for us to specifically take up the limited resources we have. So that's really and and I'm I'm aware that not every one of these priorities uh may make it ultimately through the process as we go through the budgeting. Um that's what this process is um uh for input, but that that's what it means to prioritize. So that's the approach that I'm taking. Um right now if there's no further comment, a motion would be in order to adopt uh the uh fiscal year 2027 council priorities.

I propose a motion to adopt the uh 2027 city council priorities um as presented by city manager Brian Le. I'll second motion by council member Hines, second by council member. If there's no further discussion, uh, roll call, please. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member Vivey. Hi. Council member Scazola. Mayor, Mayor Fado. Hi.

Thank you. We now move on to item number uh 10.2, to the appointment uh of a vice mayor. Um I will say that we did have a a public comment. Um once again I had a card here from Susan Landry, but she also submitted a written statement which I believe the council has received at their desk. Um since this is an item of business specifically for the council, uh I will ask if first if there's any public comment on this matter. Uh seeing none, uh then I'll bring it back to the council. Um for my speaking for myself, I would like to uh see and I would like to nominate council member by to serve as vice mayor for the remainder of the term. A second motion and a second. U may may I just make a brief comment?

Of course.

Um just explain my thinking to the public. Um unlike many other cities, we do have guidelines that um we we've adopted discussed um a number of times in in terms of what the rotation should be and because we have districts that are numerical um it it makes it easy. Um I I think in during assign it's important to have stability to follow our process and so in my view thing that's different is the timing um at this time but I I support following the rotation policy as set out. Okay, I know we were provided with the information on the rotation policy. However, my interpretation is that's not specifically a subject uh of this matter. I mean of this whether we continue to follow the rotation policy that was adopted by the council before for the selection of mayor and vice mayor on the year of basis in my opinion is is not a matter of discussion even though the information was provided to us that's my opinion both so in any event um

I would just make comments I think it's logical what you proposed uh because it doesn't mess up the continuation. It just it is what it is. It's an unusual circumstance, but uh it kind of resets since and is turning out, so it makes sense. I support it. Thank you. Well, I want to thank the council for their support and and nomination. Assuming that it goes through, I'd be happy to fulfill the duties of the vice mayor this year. If there's no other com. Council member Lopez. Hi. Council member Hines. Hi. Council member.

Hi. Council member Skazola. Hi. Mayor Fado. Hi. Uh, congratulations, Vice Mayor By. And, uh, we'll move on. So, that concludes that item. We now move to item 11.1. It is the last item on the agenda. And, uh, This has to do with um council member reports. So um who would who would like to say something? Do we want to next next meeting perhaps? Uh I'm sorry. I was just merely suggesting maybe we uh save them for next meeting since it's it's pretty late unless

I'll go ahead and give my council updates committee updates uh that I that I had. Um the uh um we uh I attended the Korean-American Full Moon Festival which was fantastic. The Campbell Little League had a flyover. Campbell PD got a made a flyover. That was pretty cool uh to to see that. Um and of course to celebrate Campbell went to my first seder uh at Villa Reggusa. There were over 50 elected electives there. It was really fantastic. I attended the South Bay Labor Coalition and there was a um Zolaf Grin gave a comment that uh she had gotten from Pelosi saying that uh uh diversity is our power power and unity is our strength. I thought that was a really good comment to be able to continue. And then I'll do a shout out to John and Teresa of Artworks on Dell Avenue. They do stained glass and it's really beautiful and impressive uh what they do. I encourage you that if if you see any stained glass, likely they've had a play in it.

Thank you. So, I wanted to just point out um that there was an article in in the uh San Jose Mercury and South as well as Paul over the weekend about our theater and um uh our partnership with the Campbell Union School District um who are uh uh producing and performing Alice and Wonderland at theater. And it the article talks about the theater and and the friends of the Heritage Theater. part of the mission when the theater was initially um uh developed was to en encourage students to be able to perform in the in the theater. So that's actually happen happening and it's um uh a partnership with the school district. So I just wanted to point that out and there are the show is uh this uh March 26 through the 28th and I know that there are tickets still available if anyone is interested in seeing Alice in Wonderland by u middle school students. And the second um uh item I had is I attended the cities association meeting uh last two weeks ago and um there was a study session that they held on the ALPR programs with various cities and uh the chief of Lascatus and uh the county sheriff presented an information report on it and no action was taken on it. That's it.

Sure. Uh so chaired the BTA pack uh attended SVCE board meeting uh attended the South Bay Labor brunch and also celebrate Campbell.

Sure. Um I was also able to stop by uh celebrate um uh Campbell. It was fantastic and and congratulations to um our our business of the year Water Tower Kitchen and our other um awardees. Um also attended um along with uh Mayor Ferado who welcomed folks. Council Hines the U JCRC Freedom Seder was my first uh seder uh attending and so um you really didn't have a moment to uh to to rest. You had a lot of tasks uh uh keep you going, make sure you're paying attention. Yeah. Uh very very specific. So um but but a lot of fun. um also had the um distinct honor and privilege of attending um an event hosted by Cal Train um in San Francisco to celebrate both the electrification of Cal Train um but also specifically the naming of a uh Cal Train vehicle after uh Speaker Merida Nancy Pelosi and hearing remarks uh from her really a special occasion with with many of our local representatives um in in attendance as as well. um and um was also able to attend the um civic well uh conference which focuses on um climate change impacts, wildfire risk, transportation. So as I get some of those uh presentations back um I always like to share those with staff in the appropriate um uh departments and if anyone's interested in uh speaking further about some of those topics, always happy to to share. Those were uh my highlights.

Thank you. And um I wanted to mention that uh uh on Monday of this week, the new CEO for the West Valley Sanitation District, Tim Kezer, the former city manager of Grass Valley and he also was the manager of their uh wastewater program and treatment plant, uh has begun his new job as the CEO of the West Valley sanitation district. Um I attended the um Campbell Police Foundation uh annual breakfast at the home church. Um and it was a very successful event, very well attended. Uh generated some funds uh for the extra projects that the uh police department foundation uh funds and um we had a report uh by the police chief as well. So that was a good event. And then um I also did of course attend the celebrate Campbell citizen of the year uh program. And while that's already been reported on, I wanted to mention that they had during that time a very successful fundraising effort to raise money for the annual toy program. Uh there were very a number of very generous people who made nice donations to you know uh set them u up for uh again another very successful year. won't come till next December. Uh but of the toy distribution and they have a it's been an excellent program for many many years. Besides toys, they always make sure that they provide each child uh with a book. So it's a combination of work play if you will and uh our new library that's going to open up is going to have some great programs for kids and a special play area for very young children and toddlers. So with that, we have come to the end of this very long meeting. I thank everyone's patience uh and attendance uh uh for this meeting and it's my uh duty to adjourn the meeting. Thank you.